Jump to content

At Least Barton Springs Pool is Fine! City Says Hold My Craft Beer

atomheartbevo

By atomheartbevo
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 90090

Posted
Posted

https://www.kxan.com/news/city-considering-whether-to-let-creek-water-flow-into-barton-springs-pool/

Quote

The city of Austin is considering whether to install gates in the upstream dam of Barton Springs Pool, allowing creek water to flow through the pool for the first time in decades.

Watershed Protection officials say the city is still studying the impact on swimmers and ecosystem alike.

Restoring the natural flow of water through Barton Springs Pool has been identified as one of the city’s goals in its Barton Springs Pool Master Plan.

Officials say potential benefits include mitigating sediment discharges by increasing the water turnover rate and improving the ecosystem of the pool.

Regardless of what the studies say, this is causing a shitstorm among some groups.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
El Diablo

El Diablo 4232

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Huh?  Surely the spring water that currently feeds the pool is less contaminated than whatever shit would get washed down the creek?  How would this "improve the ecosystem" of the pool?  Would it just be more throughput?

Creek water has Brawndo. But seriously, maybe it has more nutrients for micro flora and fauna? Beats me. I'm sticking with Brawndo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 90090

Posted
  • Author
Posted

From reddit:

Quote

Officials say potential benefits include mitigating sediment discharges by increasing the water turnover rate

They think they're going to decrease sediment discharges by pushing water through it? If the water is stagnant, where is all the new sediment coming from?

What am I missing?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 46493

Posted
Posted

They wouldn't be able to cut off spring flow into the pool, except by whatever tiny amount might be reduced by added water pressure due to a slight rise in water level.  So, they'd basically be increasing flow on the downstream side to accommodate the additional creek flow.  With no expertise on the matter and not much thought put into it, I'm gonna go with "bad idea". 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

The Austin city motto should be "If it's not broke let's fuck it up, and if it is let's fuck it up worse"

Why do we have to have such an incredibly incompetent city government in such a great city? It boggles the mind. 

Yeah lets open up Barton Spring to potential pollution from Barton creek because, well sediment runoff? Fuck those assholes. If you are going to make an idiotic proposal at least explain how it somehow benefits us without using ridiculous doublespeak and nonsense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted

Alright after thinking about so to actually defend the imbeciles on this matter, the only thing I can possibly come up with is they think increasing the flow from Barton Creek will reduce the amount of algae that builds up on the rocks in the shallow end of the pool, which does make it slippery.

I doubt that would help, but if that’s what they are thinking, they should say ITS TOO MAKE THE SHALLOW END LESS SLIPPERY (AT LEAST WE HOPE)  instead of giving us their ecological bullshit.

Ok. Done defending them now. They are in all likelihood full of shit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 90090

Posted
  • Author
Posted
34 minutes ago, dingleberryswitzer said:

If they are worried about natural ecology and shit, maybe tear the pool and dam up and return it to the natural state.

“We’d like to get rid of the pool”

”It’s beloved, constantly used, brings in millions every year, and turns a profit”

”Let’s run the creek into the pool and spring area.  Even if the creek is clean, people will flip out”

”Hmmm.....if people stop using it as much, it will lose money, and we can claim that we are trying to be responsible and not subsidize failing properties.  We might even have to use that area for something else.  Maybe build a mixed-use development!”

”I like you’re thinking!”

Conspiracy 101

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Whistler

The Whistler 14

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, Asithappens said:

So, learn me then.

How is restoring the natural flow of water fucking it up?

what this guy said

great tourist attraction?  check

great revenue stream?  doubtful

environmental factors to consider (not including humans swimming in contaminated waters) of messing up the natural flow?  seems fairly important

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, The Whistler said:

what this guy said

great tourist attraction?  check

great revenue stream?  doubtful

environmental factors to consider (not including humans swimming in contaminated waters) of messing up the natural flow?  seems fairly important

Who gives a shit whether or not the pool is a “great revenue stream.” Also what are these “environmental factors” that you believe are “fairly important?” The spring water somehow needs the creek water? WTF? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
High Plains Drifter

High Plains Drifter 11059

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

so...the whole idea is to "mitigate sediment discharges?" 

the fuck does that mean?

 

see below

 

 

2 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

Alright after thinking about so to actually defend the imbeciles on this matter, the only thing I can possibly come up with is they think increasing the flow from Barton Creek will reduce the amount of algae that builds up on the rocks in the shallow end of the pool, which does make it slippery.

I doubt that would help, but if that’s what they are thinking, they should say ITS TOO MAKE THE SHALLOW END LESS SLIPPERY (AT LEAST WE HOPE)  instead of giving us their ecological bullshit.

Ok. Done defending them now. They are in all likelihood full of shit. 

 

2 hours ago, BottleRocket said:

 


Let’s see.

Pure spring water?

Or

Pure spring water mixed with urban runoff?

 

 

"pure spring water" lol. That pure spring water is contaminated with urban runoff, leaky septic tank shit, dog shit runoff, god only knows what.

 

1 hour ago, Deej said:

Feces + fertilizer runoff = pool being closed most of the year due to excessive algae.

 

I think I may actually know something about this, for once. However, I haven't actually lived in Austin for 20 years, so my knowledge, such as it is, may be outdated.

 

Deej, back when, the pool would be closed when the fecal coliform bacteria count was above a certain level. (Do they still do this, I don't know. Do they even still test, I don't know). Fecal coliform bacteria is used as a marker for sewage contamination. The fecal coliform bacteria would get into the pool via the springs, not the creek. It would get into the springs because runoff would drain directly into the aquifer via creeks and streams that would flood during heavy rains, instead of slowly seeping into the aquifer via the topsoil. Increasing urbanization of the watershed shifts more water entering the aquifer via the creeks instead through the topsoil. The topsoil acts as a natural filter to the bacteria and other bad stuff (fertilizers, chemicals, whatever). There are places in Barton Creek where the water drains directly into the aquifer with no filtering at all. It literally can look like a giant drain has opened up under the surface of the creek water.

This pic isn't from Barton Creek, I just yanked it from the internet, but I have seen things that look like this in the Barton Creek watershed.

cripplecrawfish.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

 

The same shit (literally) that increases the fecal coliform bacteria also acts as a fertilizer to algae, which is why there is so much algae growing on the bottom and floating on the surface. When this algae dies, it creates shit tons of sediment which sinks to the bottom, and turns the bottom of the pool into a disgusting mudhole. This sediment gets kicked up by swimmers and waders and makes the water cloudy. This dying and decaying algae also results in decreasing the available O2 in the water, which means less fish can live in the water. Google "eutrophication". Note that whether the pool gets water from the creek or not, this is happening in the pool.

 

Back when I was still around, the staff would try to alleviate the slick algae on the bottom of the shallow end by draining the pool once or twice a week and blasting it off with high pressure water washers, or scrubbing it with a heavy scrubber thing pulled behind a tractor, which is very labor intensive. (Before that, going back to the 80s and early 90s they would drain the pool and spray chlorine on the bottom and sides. This definitely stopped the algae from growing, along with pretty much everything else. A giant fish kill caused by the pool being refilled too early after the chlorine was applied but before it could fully evaporate in the 90s, along with the discovery of the Barton Springs Salamander, put a stop to the chlorine thing. Some idiot lifeguard sinking the tractor into the deep end put an end to the tractor thing ). Anyway, this blasting with the high pressure also creates sediment, which is also bad for the salamander habitat, but at least it makes the shallow end a little safer for kids to walk around in by reducing the amount of slick algae.

 

Also, the creek regularly, or at least used to regularly, floods into the pool over the upstream dam during or after heavy rains anyway. And yes, that would turn the pool into a shit hole. But I don't think this idea would affect that type of flooding one way or another.

 

I suspect that what the city means when they say "mitigate sediment discharges" is that allowing a natural, constant flow through the pool by the creek would help constantly wash all that sediment out of the pool, instead of it building up in the pool like it does now. This would result in clearer water, and better habitat for the salamander, but not less algae. If allowing the creek to flow directly into the pool significantly increased the amount of pollution in the water, I really don't think the city would go along with that. Any intermittent pollution washed in by the creek after heavy rains would pretty quickly be washed out.

 

Either way, intermittent pollution is already getting into the pool from the springs anyway.

 

The flow into the pool due to the springs under the diving board (which varies considerably based on rainfall) is not enough to wash any meaningful amounts of sediments out of the pool.

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
High Plains Drifter

High Plains Drifter 11059

Posted
Posted

I don't know if that was directed at me or not, but yes, I realize the obvious.

 

I honestly don't have enough current info to know if this "natural flow" idea is good one or not, or what the benefits and negatives would be to the pool, to the swimmers, to the cleanliness of the pool water, to salamander, to whatever the fuck.

 

And neither do any of you assholes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

I don't know if that was directed at me or not, but yes, I realize the obvious.

 

I honestly don't have enough current info to know if this "natural flow" idea is good one or not, or what the benefits and negatives would be to the pool, to the swimmers, to the cleanliness of the pool water, to salamander, to whatever the fuck.

 

And neither do any of you assholes.

No that was not directed at you.

If the City’s idea is a good one, which I doubt, they are doing a piss poor job of communicating it, which is not surprising in the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Whistler

The Whistler 14

Posted
Posted

look i don't know shit, but fucking with the natural ecosystem can be a problem for the environment, not necessarily mankind.  i'm speaking out of my ass here, but how long were the creeks and springs doing before human intervention?  and I'm not discounting the fact that human could have made it worse and it is responsible to correct it with human intervention, or versa vice.  i'm just not seeing valid arguments that take a holistic view of the environment man....  puff puff pass.  environment is strong and adaptable without human intervention, but that's not to say we shouldn't intervene so long as the reasons aren't selfish to us species.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Whistler

The Whistler 14

Posted
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Who gives a shit whether or not the pool is a “great revenue stream.” Also what are these “environmental factors” that you believe are “fairly important?” The spring water somehow needs the creek water? WTF? 

i certainly don't give a shit if it's a great revenue stream, but i gurantee you it plays a role in the decision making process.  there is upkeep you know.  and believe is a strong word.  environmental factors empossases a lot.  i don't have the "fairly important" factors you're looking for other than humans are most often a detriment to nature when not actively seeking to improve it.  just throwing the word "pool" out there seems a bit off in terms of the natural flow of things.  i dunno.  pass again.

Edited by The Whistler
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, The Whistler said:

i certainly don't give a shit if it's a great revenue stream, but i gurantee you it plays a role in the decision making process.  there is upkeep you know.  and believe it a strong word.  environmental factors empossases a lot.  i don't have the "fairly important" factors you're looking for other than humans are most often not a detriment to nature when not actively seeking to improve it.

Como? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...