Who Will Step Forward and Save Our Lakes

We are at a cross roads on saving the Savannah River Basin from future droughts. We came up with a petition to lower the flows to 3100cfs as a stop gap measure when the lakes were down 15 feet and still dropping. We also stirred up a hornet's nest of interest on the part of congressman and governors in the affected area with everyone realizing something needed to be done. We even stumbled onto a solution that works for both sides of the dam.

Based on Corps data if you drop to a discharge of 3600cfs when Lake Thurmond drops 2ft below full and hold that until it refills you never lose the lakes even in the worst case drought that just ended. This solution is not just to keep the lakes useable for lake interests. More importantly it protects the downstream businesses, cities, and environmental concerns from the devastation that would have occurred if the lakes had actually gone dry.

Now since the lakes are about to refill we are losing the momentum we had gathered toward coming up with a permanent solution. Unless someone steps forward and changes the drought management plan we could repeat the problems of the past several years when another drought appears. The change needed is simple but we need someone in a position of power to step forward and make it happen. For example Col. Kertis with the Corps or one of our congressman or either of the two governors involved could make this happen by calling a meeting of everyone involved and putting the proposed change to the drought plan to a vote. I would suggest a second petition but resistance to this is high since one has just been completed and there would still have to be a meeting of the principle parties involved to actually make a change to the plan. Let's all pray and make phone calls, write letters, and send emails to encourage someone to step forward and get this done.

CORPS NEEDS TO DO THE RIGHT THING

I am thankful for Gresham Barrett's help on the lake situation but the $2million study he has proposed could easily be avoided if the Corps would just use their engineering skills and do the study on their own. All the data that is needed for a massive improvement in our drought plan is fully available from the excellent records the Corps has kept since the lakes were built. For example it is easy to look at what lake levels would have done in the past if we had changed the drought plan such that the flows are reduced to 3600cfs whenever the lake drops more than 2 ft in level. And the data is there to determine what would have happened in the past in terms of flood conditions if this model were followed. Besides, the Corps could do such a study in days and eliminate the extensive time delays involved if we mount a major independant study.

There is one place where further study would be beneficial. That would be for each downstream interest to look at what their lower limits really are should the Corps want to reduce flows to less than 3600cfs on a temporary basis for some future level management situation. But as a taxpayer I don't see the need for government to fund such studies. The paper plants and nuclear power plants could fund such work from their normal operating expenses. And the cities downstream and environmental interests could also fund their own studies to give them a basis for comment should lower flows be proposed. Regardless, the current 3600cfs year round should make for satisfactory operation until further information and future needs are evaluated.

In short in my opinion we are ready now to adopt a new drought plan that initiates reduced flows as soon as the lakes drop 2ft rather than using the current drought plan trigger levels. And 3600cfs should suffice until further study can be done. We do not need a government study to initiate such a change. We simply need leadership from the Corps. Everyone will readily accept such a proposal if the Corps puts their knowledge and influence behind it. I believe we have an excellent leader in Col. Kertis and I am hopeful that he will continue to show excellent leadership qualities and make this happen. If he does he will be following the lead of many other excellent leaders who simply "do the right thing".

LAKE'S RISING BUT PROBLEM WILL CONTINUE UNLESS DROUGHT PLAN IS REVISED IMMEDIATELY

Lake Thurmond is 5.5ft from normal fill and more rain is on the way so we are looking good from the stand point of mother Nature. But unless we change the drought plan immediately we will be right back into a major problem before the summer is over. We need for interested congressional leaders, our two state Governors, the Corps of Engineers, the NOAA, downstream water users, and lake interests to come together and formulate a new drought plan before it is too late. The plan should provide for keeping the lakes full by matching releases with the average rainfall coming in each year and the lakes should never be allowed to drop more than 2ft before initiating the drought plan so that we don't lose control of the levels. The plan should also provide for studies to determine real release limits based on both the needs and flexibilities of downstream users and environmental concerns. We should never again be put in a position of possibly destroying the lakes during a drought because of not knowing actual river flow rate parameters.

What is at stake is not just the lake becoming unsightly. We are talking serious consequences both upstream and downstream. Most people do not realize that the river is as threatened as the lake when the lake drops to the levels of the past drought. Once the lake drops below 312' river flows will no longer be predictable. Instead of downstream users being able to count on the 3600cfs used in drought control, river flows could easily drop to levels of 500cfs which would be disastrous to downstream users.

Up stream the real losses experienced so far of billions of dollars in property values and business interests are peanuts compared to the losses that will be experienced if we lose confidence in the lake remaining full. Recreation interests will disappear and find other places to go. The lure as an attractive place as a lake residence and retirement community will be gone along with all the people living in the area for these reasons. And businesses connected with the lake will be gone forever.

So far as fish and wild life, whether endangered or otherwise, they would experience drastic and possibly life threatening changes in both the Savannah River and the lakes. To allow this now that we are back to full lakes and know how to avoid it should be taken as a direct violation of all environmental protection laws directed at protecting fish and wildlife in the Savannah River Basin. The NOAA for one should demand that such measures be adopted before the lakes can return to the drought deprived condition of the past few years.