Letter To The Editor: Cape’s Dam Controversy
Dear Editor,
As a registered voter and resident of San Marcos, I am concerned about the City Council’s seeming hastiness to remove Cape’s Dam, especially with only one study having been conducted to “explore the (environmental) effects” of its removal.
This area near I35 of the San Marcos River that is used for safe entry for our Boy Scouts or inexperienced the Disabled, and Veterans Programs will indisputably be changed for the worse.
It is the only ramped, safe entry point along the San Marcos River where instructors and caregivers can assist those that need to be helped. With a narrower, faster moving current, this will not be possible and those citizens will have lost their haven.
It seems the focus of this issue has been amiss. Does the safe reproduction of a certain fish or TWR really take precedence over the health and emotional wellbeing of our disabled citizens and veterans?
Furthermore, imagine the shock to hear that the reproduction increase was less than 1% in the first report. Worse still, we will actually pay with taxpayer dollars to fill in part of our San Marcos River?
I know many in this community that have not been informed of the gravity of this issue and would like the opportunity to have their say. The removal of Cape’s Dam needs to be left to the tax paying voters of San Marcos to decide.
Best Regards,
Haley Johnson Hays County Republican Women
One person or company was sway over such a large decision? One that will affect so many? For a fish. This is NOT the act of a city responsible to its citizenry, this is an act bordering on tyranny. Open this to the general public, make it known. I am not a part of your city, but I make my way down there a few times each year for various reasons and will gladly make my way there for this. We need to think more about the people that use this that the few hundred fish that will be helped.
The “one study” published by the two PhDs depended on years of empirical data and research, theirs and also among an exhaustive list of sources, regarding the scenarios of removal or rebuilding Cape’s Dam to half height and full height. The level of the river will remain basically the same upstream from the dam’s “head” effect (backwater) and then downstream of the dam site. The same amount of water flows downstream, with the dam or without it.
Some folks are concerned with recreation, as you are Haley Johnson and some with the endangered species of Texas wild rice and the fountain darter, and many people care about all, including your Boy Scouts, disabled folks and military veterans (I am one) . Some people care about none of it. Everyone has their own way to go. Your city officials had MANY public meetings regarding the dam and even a tour last summer of the area. They made a decision and it was NOT a snap one. They were elected to make a decision and they did; your input was welcomed. –>
http://www.sanmarcostx.gov/index.aspx?page=1379
As far as the cost of dam removal, the Fish & Wildlife Service will remove the dam at no cost to the city. Rebuilding the dam would be another story altogether.
I invite you to read all or part of the study commissioned by the City to be able to make an informed decision. I read it all tonight. Most of it is backup data, measurements and hydrology and I don’t pretend to have understood it all. But I would invite you to read the conclusions reached, all pointing to removal of the dam for water level, endangered species, plant and animal diversity and the health of the San Marcos River. Start on about Page 20 to skip most of the data and read to Page 29 if you want to see some conclusions.
Good luck with your Boy Scouts, disabled folks and veterans. I think they will all find the river haven as enjoyable as ever.
I don’t live in San Marcos but I live in a town downstream and love the river. I want it to run clean, clear and forever. Many of my friends are smart and active river enthusiasts, some live on it and some just love the San Marcos River that fosters the town — for its own sake.