IS CORPS DROUGHT PLAN ETHICAL?

I keep hearing about having to meet power quotas as the final, last excuse for the poor lake level control from our drought plan.  When we started looking into all the reasons the Corps offered to justify poor lake level control there were about 10 excuses being stated as reasons.  One by one we have eliminated those and we are finally down to power quotas.  LOOKING JUST AT POWER QUOTAS TO JUSTIFY POOR LEVEL CONTROL, IS THEIR REASONING ETHICAL?

Here is my thinking.  Hydro Power, Wind Power, and Solar Power are all inexpensive sources of power and they all three have the advantage of being renewable sources of power.  If you are using wind power and there is no wind you have to resort to makeup power.  If you are using solar power and there is no sun the same is true.  The same should be true of hydro power.  Instead what the Corps does when there is too little rain is continue unsupportable release rates and destroy the recreational infrastructure of the lakes.

Talking with SEPA managers in the past we have been told the power from the other 7 basins in their system is adequate to make up for losses from our lakes during a drought.  But even assuming that is not true and they have to buy make up power on the open market, how does that justify destroying my real estate values or those of all the other people living around the lakes.  How does that justify holding this impoverished area back from the fantastic growth potential of a great location for recreation. We could be like the Grand Strand on the East Coast instead of a lack luster recreational site.

My upbringing tells me it is wrong to steal from one group to pay another. Isn't that what is going on here? Isn't the current thinking of the Corps where they justify destroying lake levels at the expense of all lake stakeholders to meet power quotas unethical?