WHAT IF LAKE STAKEHOLDERS WERE INVOLVED IN CORPS DECISIONS ON OPERATING THE SAVANNAH RIVER BASIN

As I've mentioned numerous times we desperately need Lake Stakeholders who have significant skin in the game representing us at Corps meetings where lake level control, release rates, overall drought plans and routine operations, are discussed.  Take for example the Corps' recent announcement that they may keep Hartwell at full pool through the winter while drawing Thurmond down 4' for flood control.  Someone who has no substantial stake in the lakes is not going to be able to represent us fairly. 

At first glance you would expect Lake Thurmond stakeholders to be up in arms.  But looking at this from a purely selfish viewpoint, this is not necessarily a bad thing for Lake Thurmond.  Here is where a lake stakeholder could make a difference.  Someone knowledgeable of Lake Thurmond would recognize the following:

• Level changes of 4' or less, while not desirable, do no significant damage to the recreation infrastructure.
• If the Corps includes a proviso not to drop Thurmond more than 4' without bringing the lakes into balance, having Hartwell at full pool would help prevent the drastic loss in control that occurs when you come into a dry summer with both lakes 4' below full pool. 
• With the proviso above, having Hartwell at full pool actually gives a buffer should we encounter a dry spell coming out of the winter.  

In other words, what at first glance is a horrible decision for folks around Lake Thurmond could actually prove to be a plus.  Naturally everyone just assumes that people around Lake Thurmond would prefer both lakes to be dropped only 2'.  But that could be a problem if the rainfall is unbalanced and Thurmond gets more than its share of rain. Hence it is far better to hold Hartwell at full pool than be forced to drop both lakes 4'.

This is just one example of how lake stakeholders can add input the environmentalists and other interests cannot.  Another example is the practice of shutting down releases from Russell over the weekends during the summer.  This practice causes a significant drop in Lake Thurmond levels which are enough to beach the houseboats pulled along shore on weekends trying to enjoy a cove somewhere.  A stakeholder from Lake Thurmond would vote for releases to be continued on the weekends.  If they have to be stopped for a couple of days each week, mid week would be a much better time than the weekend.

These are just a few of the less obvious inputs lake stakeholders could add to Corps meetings involving the lakes.  It is important that the person or persons representing lake stakeholders have significant skin in the game concerning our recreational infrastructure.  They need to understand what lake levels do to real estate values, businesses connected with the lakes, recreation in general and the economic impact of all the people who come here each year for recreation. All these issues are part of the recreation infrastructure; not just whether you can water ski or fish at a given spot.

Although they may be great people, it is unfair to expect environmentalists and persons of similar backgrounds to represent recreation interests fairly.