RESPONSE TO RECENT BALANCING THE BASIN CONCERNING WINTER DRAWDOWN

I was delighted to read in the latest issue of Balancing the Basin how the Corps is addressing our request for a 2' drawdown this winter.  It is obvious they are listening to some of the concerns being expressed by Lake Stakeholders concerning the drought plan.  That is definitely a step in the right direction and it is greatly appreciated.  However we still have a long way to go before we are going to get proper balance in the decision process concerning our drought plan.  For example, concerning the 2' drawdown, they could just as easily gone the other way and used a 2' drawdown now with a future study to determine if an increase in flood storage capacity over what was used in the past might be warranted.  Personally I doubt seriously if there has been so much change since the 4' rule was put in place that we now need the equivalent of 8'.  But I am not part of the decision process.

The problem lies in who is making the decisions and who is interpreting the data. For example if the British parliament had been the group making all the decisions for the American colonies we would still be under British rule.  Our founding fathers expressed the same concern we have here.  They were concerned about taxation without representation.  We are concerned with management of our lakes without lake stakeholders having proper representation.  Had lake stakeholders been involved in this decision there would be at least two major differences in the way it is being handled.

1. we would not have waited so long before doing something whether it be a study or change the drawdown.  The request to go to a 2' draw down was made over a year ago.  Why are we just now getting around to a study?
2. we would have brought to the table the logic that not going to 2' is like changing the old plan to 8' with the obvious suggestion that we hold at the equivalent of the original 4' drawdown until a study is completed.

We need someone who can get us representation at the decision table and that representation needs to be a person or persons with a significant stake in the recreational infrastructure around our lakes.  A yes man who is excited to be involved with Corps meetings is not what we need.  We also need congressional help that would insist on such a set up. 

Following is a copy of an email Jerry Clontz recently received from Gary Gerrard who is running for congress from the 10th district in Georgia.  He sounds like someone who could finally make this happen.  Regardless of whether you live in the Georgia 10th district or not you should look at possibly helping Gary with a contribution so we can finally get someone in office who will help us get this mess fixed.

Email sent to Jerry Clontz from Gary Gerrard on 10/9/13

In response to your question about what I would do if elected to Congress for your membership, I would be as unaccepting of deliberate misinformation and stalling on your issues as I was on the Corps' attempt to prevent my campaign event at the Soap Creek Marina.  I would insist on being heard and getting timely, responsive and thoughtful answers to how the lake is managed.  The Corps is required by statute to include consideration of your interests in managing the lakes, and I would insist that the Corps do so.

jon clerry spokesman for save our lakes now