Lake Martin Topics: Question for Mythbuster

Lake Martin Topics

(Lake Martin Specific)

111,170 messages

Updated 5/28/2024 5:46:58 PM

Off-Topic

Lakes Online Forum

83,644 messages

Updated 5/28/2024 9:14:08 AM

Boat Maintenance

Lakes Online Forum

5,193 messages

Updated 4/3/2024 3:47:36 AM

Lake Martin Fishing

(Lake Martin Specific)

4,170 messages

Updated 5/28/2024 5:21:13 AM

Jokes

Lakes Online Forum

4,169 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM

Sports

Lakes Online Forum

4,261 messages

Updated 5/28/2024 6:31:10 AM

Grilling & Recipes

Lakes Online Forum

2,976 messages

Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM

Lake Martin SCUBA

(Lake Martin Specific)

169 messages

Updated 5/31/2023 1:39:35 PM

Tallapoosa River Topics

Lakes Online Forum

98 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM

Forum Usage Rules

Welcome, Guest

Select View Mode: [ classic | beta | recent ]

	Name:	MythBuster -
	Subject:	Question for Mythbuster
	Date:	6/21/2007 12:19:42 AM

Obviously, the safe answer to YOUR question is "about one foot below full pool." However, given the way things are right now, you would have to consider the mindset of the powers-that-be when they looked at lake levels, lake sizes, etc. and saw these two things:
1-- that the rivers downstream from Lake Martin were in dire need of water, and
2-- that Lake Martin was just about full of water that could be used downstream.

So I would guess-- and I stress the word guess-- that Lake Martin would not be nearly as full as most people think it would had the winter drop been six feet less, because I think a lot of the water conserved this winter would have been used for downstream purposes this spring. Exactly what the current level would be, though, I don't know, since I don't know exactly how much of the "extra six feet" they would have used.

However... THAT WAS NOT THE ORIGINAL QUESTION, AND SO THE ANSWER I GAVE DID NOT CONSIDER FACTORS LIKE HIGHER WINTER LEVELS.