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.

No comments: