Sunday, November 21, 2010

HISTORY OF CORPS MISMANAGEMENT OF LAKE THURMOND

Stakeholders around Lake Thurmond and the other lakes of the Savannah River Basin are being given the short end of the stick by the Corps. In previous droughts while our lake was being destroyed aesthically by drastic drops in level we pleaded with the Corps for a better approach to managing lake levels. I guess we sounded like a bunch of spoiled brats demanding their way. And to a certain extent we were selfishly seeking better level control for our own interests.

The Corps spoke out authoritatively about how they had to live up to certain demands by congress and were helpless to accomadate our requests. It even sounded like they were right because power generation, dissolved oxygen levels, spider lilly extinction, endangering the short nosed sturgeon, etc. etc. all sounded very plausible.

Then we started delving into each of these concerns ourselves to see if anything had been overlooked that might permit better level control. As we did we found out that there is plenty of water to meet all these demands. Rainfall, even during the worst drought on record, was enough to take care of all the Corps concerns if they would simply adjust the amount of water released annually from the dam to the amount that comes down from rain over a years time. We then proposed the Corps do just that and decrease flow from the dam to match annual rainfall rates anytime the lake is down 2 ft. This simple measure would prevent the lake from dropping more than 8 ft from full pool and if they would drop flows a little more during the cold months we could keep the lake from dropping more than 4 or 5 ft. This is where the recommndation for releases of 3,600cfs (3,100 during colder months) anytime the lakes are down more than 2 ft came from.

The Corps has turned a deaf ear to our recommendations. And they have no way to justify their position. None of the reasons for not decreasing flows are justifiable. Rather than manage the level better the Corps has chosen to maintain a river flow higher than that provided by nature. In doing so the Corps is creating an unanatural situation below the dam that could eventually destroy our whole system. If the drought goes on long enough it could mean we are no longer able to provide adequate water for Augusta and other users downstream. So this is not just a selfish concern for our interests.

No where in the stated responsibilities of the Corps is a river flow above that provided from nature justifiable. The original bases for operation of Lake Thurmond were:
1) flood control
2) hydro power
3) navigation

Later the following were added:
4) recreation
5) water quality
6) water supply
7) fish and wildlife

And in 1993 a federal court ruled that the Corps also needs to consider impact on local economics equal to these other concerns.

Maintaining an artificial river flow in excess of what mother nature provides is not required to meet any of these needs. Matter of fact operation at reduced release rates equivalent to the annual rainfall during the worst drought on record was demonstrated to meet all 8 concerns. For example fear of damaging the tiger lilly (a fish and wildlife concern) was in error. It turns out that artificial flows from the dam were damaging the tiger lilly by washing pollen off the stems prematurely and preventing natural propagation. Another example, damaging the short nosed sturgeon was found to be of no concern with the flow rates proposed. Hydro power is actually benefitted by keeping the lakes as full as possible (The South Eastern Power Association was quoted as saying they would rather reduce flows to keep the lake level high than to maintain higher flows and let the lakes drop lower. Water quality and supply are not a problem at the rates we recommended, and so on it goes. What is damaged by maintaining high artificial flows to the river the way the Corps insists is recreation and economics and the whole system is put in jeopardy of failure if the drought persists long enough.

When we discuss these items with the Corps they bring in any number of imagined problems that need to be addressed such as dissolved oxygen content of the water. But when they are proposing a project of their own that might actually drop oxygen contents (such as dredging Savannah Harbor) they simply put in artificial airation to correct the problem. And as for their excuse that they can't make changes without congresses approval, Corps management has repeatedly stated recently that they have full latitude to change flow rates if they so choose.

We are growing very tired of the lack of response from the Corps to our pleas. We need for everyone to get involved by writing the Corps and your congressman to let them know we've had enough. It's time for them to listen and quit throwing our water away to the Atlantic Ocean.

Monday, November 15, 2010

CORPS RESPONSE IN QUESTION

There are two very disturbing developments with the Corps and Control of Lake Level. First the Corps appears to have signed off on a badly flawed economic study that concluded there was only very minor impact on the economy around Lake Hartwell from the last drought. And second, with the lake dropping like a rock just like it did leading up to the last major drought the Corps is refusing to reduce release rates and close off flows from the dam when the river is swollen from rain. Such measures would help greatly with our lake levels and avoid another approach to armageddon the way we did in 2008. This is after the Corps admitted publicly that they could go to lower release rates and stop unnecesary releases at their discression.

Many leaders from the local business community have become quite concerned as well as the leadership of Save Our Lakes Now and we are reaching out to Corps leadership and our congressman for help. A letter sent today to our congressman in email form is copied below.

COPY OF LETTER SENT VIA EMAIL TO STAFF OF BROUN AND DEMINT:
Please, we need your help. The Corps of Engineers apparently is accepting an accounting report from Clemson University that is badly flawed. The study was done to determine the magnitude of economic harm caused by drastic losses in lake level during the drought of 2008. Instead of looking at economic effects of the drought such as decreased real estate values around the lake, this study looked primarily at total retail occurring in the 6 county area surrounding Lake Hartwell. This proved only that the occupants around the lake did not pack up and leave during the drought. And of course the drought, by destroying property values, made it impossible for property owners around the lake to leave. Instead they stayed and their grocery, car, movies, gas, etc. purchases remained unchanged making it look like there was no effect on the economy.

One major economic impact of lake levels is its effect on both current real estate values for lake properties and future growth from people moving into the area to enjoy the lakes. Another major loss is future developments side tracked because of fear about problems with lake levels. Marina incomes, etc. will be small in comparison. And grocery, car, movies, gas, etc. purchases for the 6 counties around Lake Hartwell is not a valid measure of economic impact of droughts.

We understand that a similar study is in progress for Lake Thurmond. A study of sales in the counties around Lake Thurmond will in no way represent the impact of droughts on this area. Real estate values for homes on the lake (there are over 4,000 properties on the lake shoreline) dropped at least $500million dollars from the drought. This is in addition to the effects of the poor economy nationwide. And there are numerous developments valued in the hundreds of millions of dollars that cannot proceed until confidence is restored in lake level control. Matter of fact huge developments that could have had a large impact on the area were cancelled in the past with fear over lake level problems given as the reason.

It is too early to know for sure but all signs point to the Corps becoming non responsive to the needs of stakeholders around the lakes. With the lake dropping rapidly the Corps is refusing to reduce release rates below those called for in the drought plan that destroyed us in 2008. This is after they have admitted they have the lattitude to decrease flows based on the experience gained in the last major drought. We were hopeful initially because they were talking about dropping releases to 3600 and 3100cfs as the weather grew cooler and they were even toying with the idea of closing off flows at the dam when the river below the dam is swollen from rains. But all that seems to have come to a halt and now the Corps is giving its blessings to the flawed economic study mentioned above.