Speaking personally, I put my retirement money into real
estate and development investments connected with the lakes of the Savannah
River Basin. Due to the poor lake level
control over the past decade those investments are worth less than half what I
put into them. I feel sure I am typical
of what has happened to a lot of lake stakeholders. Many would say these losses were unavoidable due
to droughts. In fact they are due to the
Corps’ failure to protect the recreation infrastructure around the lakes. As my predecessor pointed out many times, the
term recreation in the list of responsibilities the Corps has for our lakes is
not a few individuals fishing or enjoying water sports. Rather it is the infrastructure worth hundreds
of millions around our lakes connected with recreation. I am talking about real
estate purchased for access and enjoyment of the lake, marinas, campgrounds, marine
supplies, restaurants on the lake and the many similar investments that affect
recreation on our lakes.
Poor lake level control did not come from lack of rain. It came from mismanaging the rain that was
available. The current situation where the Corps is keeping the lakes within a
few feet of full pool demonstrates that good management of lake levels is
possible. If the same methods were employed during
drought conditions that are being used in flood conditions, the lakes could be
held to within 8ft of full pool without violating any of the limits placed on
release rates from the list of other concerns the Corps is responsible for. This degree of level variation, while not
totally desirable, is acceptable in that recreation is not seriously harmed
until the lakes drop more than 10ft.
Literally the changes required to the current drought plan would be:
·
Rather than drop the lakes 4’ in the fall, limit
the decrease to 2’. The 4’ limit came
from the time when Thurmond was the only lake and that space was needed for
heavy rains in the winter and spring. There are now 3 lakes and 2’provides the
same margin of safety that 4’ used to provide.
·
Limit the minimum release rate from Lake
Thurmond to 3,600 cfs (3,000 in the colder months) to protect environmental and
water quality/supply concerns.
Power production is not listed as a concern for two
reasons. First, SEPA has indicated on
numerous occasions that the main power concern for our lakes is the ability to
provide peaking power. Second, any short
fall in total power production can be offset by purchases from other production
areas. If you look at the added cost of
power purchased elsewhere, it is peanuts compared to the monetary value of
damages to recreation when the lakes drop more than 10’.
We will know shortly whether the Corps plans to protect
recreation the same way they do their other concerns. If they do they will hold the drop in lake
levels in the fall to only 2’. And
further they will give recreation a voice in their meetings to decide release
rates. Said voice needs to be someone
with a substantial stake in the recreation infrastructure.
No comments:
Post a Comment