RECENT COMMUNICATION WITH CORPS OF ENGINEERS

A member of Save Our Lakes Now has made several attempts to get the Corps to change their drought management plan to prevent the repeated destruction to our lakes over the past decade.  So that our readers can see the kind of comments we are making to the corps I am copying here our response to the current issue of balancing the basin and a letter we recently wrote to Colonel Tickner.

COMMENT SENT TODAY ON BALANCING THE BASIN:
Save Our Lakes Now has talked to state leaders repeatedly in the past and they have never indicated that they want the lakes to drop drastically in droughts.  Why not let the head of each of these organizations post their views. I wouldn't ask for this except that Col. Tickner is clearly trying to indicate that they are the reason he refuses to adapt to past lessons in drought management. 

So far as balancing the basin, putting the whole system at risk by throwing the limited water from rain into the ocean is not balance.

EMAIL SENT TO COLONEL TICKNER RECENTLY:
(Note the email is based on a thank you note sent to Colonel Hall years ago)

Colonel Tickner,

Following is an email we sent Col. Hall in 2012 while he was trying to improve the drought plan.  These are still items we feel would greatly improve our drought protection and provide better balance to the basin.  As you will notice Col. Hall made several changes to improve things.  But even these improvements seem to have been discontinued.  We are at a total loss as to why you feel you have no latitude as an engineer to improve matters based on experience gained in the past decade and we definitely do not understand how you can justify saving pennies on power production while destroying fortunes in recreational infrastructure. 

 
All the recommendations presented represent sound engineering logic; why are you not incorporating these into the way you manage our basin.  Surely you are not proud that we are in the same predicament concerning drought protection that occurred in the last 3 major droughts.


THANKS FROM SAVE OUR LAKES NOW (email sent several years ago to colonel hall)

 There are still several issues with drought management that we differ on but we noted with appreciation a number of items you have changed that we once had disagreement on. 

 Thanks for planning the following changes:

·       Going to 3100 during winter months below 316’ instead of 3600

·       Holding low flows until the lakes refill.  You plan 3800, we would prefer 3600, but at least you are staying below  4,000 and up flows.

·       Allowing the lakes to refill to full pool instead of stopping at rule curve levels

 
We hope you would also consider:

·       Initiating drought control flows anytime the lakes drop more than 2’ as well as looking at Broad River flows

·       Re doing the rule curve to a maximum of 2’ buffer (justifiable from increases in holding volumes of Russell and Hartwell)

·       Terminating releases from Thurmond when we are in drought conditions and the river is swollen from recent rains

·       Using 3600 (3100 in cooler months) for drought conditions rather than 3800.

·       Dropping to 3600 immediately in drought conditions versus staged decreases.

·       Including lake stakeholders in meetings where drought releases are decided

 

We feel these changes are justifiable awaiting further data from future studies in that they can be reversed at any time should the need arise.