Linked Data Explorer
Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint drought species and ecosystem management
Drought in the Southeast has brought congressional attention to an ongoing interstate water conflict among Alabama, Florida, and Georgia over water allocation and management of the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) basin. Reservoir drawdown and predictions for a continued drought have Georgia's upper basin municipal and industrial customers concerned about depleting their principal (in some cases, their only) water supply, Lake Lanier in northern Georgia. Alabama, Florida, and Georgia's lower basin interests are concerned about sustaining river flows to meet their municipal, agricultural, electrical, recreational, and ecosystem needs. In addition, four federally protected species, once widely distributed but now confined to the lower basin, are caught in the net of the controversy. The issue for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is how to manage ACF federal reservoirs, which are at record low levels, to meet needs in the upper and lower basin equitably. The challenge includes complying with federal law (e.g., the Endangered Species Act (ESA)); minimizing harm to the ACF basin and Apalachicola Bay species, ecosystems, recreation, fishing, and oyster industry; and providing flows for hydropower and thermoelectric cooling, while also meeting water needs of the Atlanta region, other communities, and industries. To varying degrees, the southeastern drought has been in effect for several years, depleting supplies in the basin's reservoirs, with Lake Lanier being the largest reservoir and therefore largest source able to supply downstream needs. The Corps therefore has released water at various times from Lake Lanier in the upper basin to meet minimum flow requirements in the lower basin Apalachicola River -- to the consternation of upper basin users As an emergency drought response in 2007, the Corps began to implement its proposal for lower flows in the Apalachicola River, thereby reducing the rate of drawdown of Lake Lanier, though heavy rains in early 2008 in the southern basin at least temporarily halted extra releases from Lake Lanier. The Corps' Exceptional Drought Operations (EDO) calls for a 16% lower flow in the Apalachicola River and measures to allow the reservoirs to refill. The EDO is being implemented in phases. Judging that the Corps' actions would neither jeopardize the continued existence of listed species nor adversely modify their critical habitat, the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) approved an initial 6% flow reduction and called for the Corps to develop criteria that would trigger further reductions. Four species protected under the Endangered Species Act -- three mussels and a sturgeon -- depend on Apalachicola River flows. The impacts of the EDO on these notably uncharismatic protected species continue to be the subject of study and debate. Yet the species protected under ESA are not the focus of debate. Rather the law itself acts as a hammer, forcing parties to reach decisions that may produce winners and losers. As climate change and population growth continue to affect ecosystems, ESA controversies may be at the center of still more stormy debates. Responses to the ACF and species protection controversy may presage responses to future river management controversies.
- "Drought in the Southeast has brought congressional attention to an ongoing interstate water conflict among Alabama, Florida, and Georgia over water allocation and management of the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) basin. Reservoir drawdown and predictions for a continued drought have Georgia's upper basin municipal and industrial customers concerned about depleting their principal (in some cases, their only) water supply, Lake Lanier in northern Georgia. Alabama, Florida, and Georgia's lower basin interests are concerned about sustaining river flows to meet their municipal, agricultural, electrical, recreational, and ecosystem needs. In addition, four federally protected species, once widely distributed but now confined to the lower basin, are caught in the net of the controversy. The issue for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is how to manage ACF federal reservoirs, which are at record low levels, to meet needs in the upper and lower basin equitably. The challenge includes complying with federal law (e.g., the Endangered Species Act (ESA)); minimizing harm to the ACF basin and Apalachicola Bay species, ecosystems, recreation, fishing, and oyster industry; and providing flows for hydropower and thermoelectric cooling, while also meeting water needs of the Atlanta region, other communities, and industries. To varying degrees, the southeastern drought has been in effect for several years, depleting supplies in the basin's reservoirs, with Lake Lanier being the largest reservoir and therefore largest source able to supply downstream needs. The Corps therefore has released water at various times from Lake Lanier in the upper basin to meet minimum flow requirements in the lower basin Apalachicola River -- to the consternation of upper basin users As an emergency drought response in 2007, the Corps began to implement its proposal for lower flows in the Apalachicola River, thereby reducing the rate of drawdown of Lake Lanier, though heavy rains in early 2008 in the southern basin at least temporarily halted extra releases from Lake Lanier. The Corps' Exceptional Drought Operations (EDO) calls for a 16% lower flow in the Apalachicola River and measures to allow the reservoirs to refill. The EDO is being implemented in phases. Judging that the Corps' actions would neither jeopardize the continued existence of listed species nor adversely modify their critical habitat, the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) approved an initial 6% flow reduction and called for the Corps to develop criteria that would trigger further reductions. Four species protected under the Endangered Species Act -- three mussels and a sturgeon -- depend on Apalachicola River flows. The impacts of the EDO on these notably uncharismatic protected species continue to be the subject of study and debate. Yet the species protected under ESA are not the focus of debate. Rather the law itself acts as a hammer, forcing parties to reach decisions that may produce winners and losers. As climate change and population growth continue to affect ecosystems, ESA controversies may be at the center of still more stormy debates. Responses to the ACF and species protection controversy may presage responses to future river management controversies."@en
- "Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint drought species and ecosystem management"@en