CORPS STUBBORNLY REFUSES TO PROTECT OUR LAKES AGAINST DROUGHT

We were hopeful that the new Colonel would listen to reason and get away from the drought plan that has destroyed our lakes repeatedly over the past decade.  Real Estate values around the lakes and the Recreational infrastructure are in desperate need of a change that would end this madness.

Since the Corps refuses to redo the drought plan, we would like to offer one that gives better balance to the various responsibilities of the Corps. First let me give the underlying bases for this approach:

• Power production is important but basically it comes down to an economic consideration.  Any time we do not produce enough power here to satisfy the power demand, it can be purchased off the grid.  The expense of buying it elsewhere is nothing compared to the money lost in real estate and recreational infrastructure when lake levels drop drastically.
• Fish and Wildlife and water supply and water quality are important but they can only be managed properly when there is adequate water in the lakes. Further, we have demonstrated repeatedly (and it is even stated in Corps documents) that these are adequately managed when release rates are at 3600cfs or higher. 
• Recreation is another responsibility of the Corps. It is destroyed anytime the lakes drop drastically.  Not only is the destruction at the time the lakes are down but we continue to suffer from a bad reputation for at least 3 years following destruction of lake levels during a drought.
• Fresh water, although it is not directly listed under the Corps responsibilities, should be recognized by the Corps as something we must protect by wasting as little as possible.  The Corps shows some understanding of this principle in water saving devices at their offices but somehow they fail to recognize that even 100cfs more than necessary in lake releases does more damage than all their conservation measures put together.
• The Corps has demonstrated that they can control lake levels to within about 6" whenever they so desire.

Applying a little logic and common sense to these facts leads to a far superior drought plan than is currently being followed.  If the lakes are held within 6" of full pool as long as they don't have to reduce release rates below 3600cfs, the basin would truly be in balance.  Even in a severe drought the loss in lake level should not be enough to be destructive.  One added factor would be to minimize the winter draw down so we don't enter a drought more than 2' below full level.

If this were the mode of operation the definition of whether we are in a drought would be simple.  It would be anytime full pool can not be maintained using release rates of 3600cfs. Downstream would now be more like what nature intended with levels and flow rates that are determined by nature rather than man.  Blame would no longer be directed at the Corps.  It would finally be directed where it should be; at nature.

We can understand that the Corps feels they are simply following orders.  But history has shown repeatedly that "DOING WHAT IS RIGHT" is far superior to blindly following orders.