SUMMARY OF DISCONNECT WITH THE CORPS

The corps keeps mentioning that they follow the water manual exactly.  And in the most recent BALANCING THE BASIN they mention that they are evaluating a number of plans for improving the drought plan.  To the casual observer our insistence on changes in the way they operate appear unjustified.

But, we have over 15 years of experience with numerous droughts and there is a lot of knowledge that was gained from those.  For example we know for a fact that the system can withstand release rates from Thurmond Dam of only 3600cfs because we have operated for many months at that release rate. What Save Our Lakes Now is saying is why not take the information we have already learned and apply it now. Why wait for the completion of further studies before incorporating what we have already learned.

So our recommendation is once the lakes cannot be held at full pool due to drought conditions we should go to 3600cfs release rate from Thurmond and adjust flows from Hartwell in a fashion that keeps both lakes in balance.  Based on the experience gained in many droughts this should keep the lakes within 8 to 10 ft of full pool even with the worst droughts we've experienced. SEPA who insists that Thurmond hydropower is primarily for peaking power would be protected against losing that ability.  Water quality and supply and fish and wildlife can survive this release rate. And the recreational infrastructure can basically handle drops of 8 to 10 ft in lake level. The time at 3600 should be better this way in a severe drought since the time to recover to full pool is decreased to a minimum.

Those of you who read Balancing the Basin may want to ask in a comment why the corps refuses to use what they have already learned and protect the recreational infrastructure.  Don't be surprised if they answer with double talk because the Corps simply does not feel they are responsible for protecting the recreational infrastructure. They seem to think it is simply whether fishermen can fish and whether boaters can put their boats in the water.  They ignore the many people who have made huge investments in building homes along the lake for the purposes of recreation and they ignore the marinas, dock builders, etc. who are an integral part of the recreational infrastructure.

CORPS VS COMMENTS ON BALANCING BASIN INTERESTING

Recent comments and the back and forth with the Corps on their posting, Balancing the Basin, are illuminating. 
Comment:
When fish and wildlife or water quality or water supply are threatened the Corps takes immediate steps to protect them. But when lake levels drop precipitously and the recreational infrastructure is threatened the Corps makes no effort to protect recreation.

Response:
The Corps responded that the comment was erroneous because they never make any changes from the guidelines in their water manual.

Just addressing that one back and forth we can see the Corps blindly follows the water manual regardless of what it may do to recreation. "I was just following orders" is an old and very lame excuse.  To an objective bystander the obvious thing to do is to get the orders changed if they are doing damages to someone.  Apparently it has never occurred to the Corps that all they would have to do is discuss changes they see are needed with Congress and the manual could be changed.

LEOPARD HAS FINALLY SHONE HIS SPOTS

We watched and watched to see if our new Colonel was truly a lake advocate as he claimed coming in.  Now it is obvious he is not.  Since early in June our release rates have been ridiculous when you consider the inflows.  The amount of fresh water being thrown away is unforgiveable.  Further we see no justification for such releases other than possibly meeting SEPA quotas.

This writer sees power production quotas that cause releases in excess of inflows as unjustifiable. First there are many other lakes that are not in drought conditions where SEPA can obtain hydro power.  And second any savings in power costs obtained in this manner come at the expense of our recreational infrastructure.  Just the financial impact on real estate values exceeds any money that may be saved in this manner. How can one justify cost savings to SEPA at the cost of the many people who own homes around the lakes. 

The Corps claims incorrectly that lake levels do not impact real estate.  Rather than look at the impact on lake side real estate they did a study that looked at the impact on whole counties.  Additionally their studies did not take into account the lag time involved for real estate values to recover from a drought when these occur repeatedly over a 10 year time period.

APPARENTLY I SPOKE TOO SOON

It appears Colonel Griffin is not the Lake Advocate we were hoping for.  The release rates from Thurmond are being increased to 4800cfs with the lakes starting to drop significantly.  Why anyone feels that is necessary is beyond my comprehension:

• there's not a river anywhere that doesn't have widely varying flows so amount of water to the river is not a valid reason
• increasing the release rates to 4800cfs does nothing for dissolved oxygen to Augusta or in the harbor
• fish and wildlife do just fine at 3600cfs
• water supply to cities downstream is OK at 3600 cfs based on past experience
• water quality was never a problem at 3600 cfs in the past
• navigation and flood control are not effected

Based on these observations the only responsibility assigned the corps that may benefit is power production.  But that is a non plus situation when you realize that SEPA can get power at the same cost from other lakes in the grid or at slightly elevated cost from other sources.  Besides it is ridiculous to save a few pennies on power at the expense of huge costs to the people who built homes along side the lake for the purpose of recreation.  It's just not fair for one group to suffer great losses for minor gains to another group.

Perhaps the greatest rationale against increasing releases to 1,200 cfs above the rates demonstrated to be safe in the past is the huge waste of fresh water.  Everywhere else people seem to think conserving fresh water is extremely important.  I've even seen waterless urinals (gee I think that was at the Corps headquarters at the Thurmond dam) designed to cut down on waste of fresh water. There are no urinals that can compare to the huge waste represented by 1,200cfs which equals 103,680,000 cubic foot a day. Ask the people of California what they think about this.  Similar behavior by groups like the Savannah District Corps is what caused their recent water crisis.

FINALLY

The new Colonel with the Corps of Engineers announced when he came on board that he was a lake advocate.  Apparently he really is. We have experienced unprecedented release rates of 3800cfs from Lake Thurmond (3600 or 3800 cfs release rate, depending on who you talk to, is minimum demonstrated to have no significant environmental impact) for 9 days now and our lakes are within a foot of full pool even though we are experiencing a drought. I personally would like to thank Colonel Marvin Griffin for making this happen.  I did a little research and found his email address.  It is sas.cesas-de@usace.army.mil.

The Savannah River Basin with its 3 lakes has always been an excellent spot for recreational interests.  But the repeated droughts since the turn of the century has taken a huge toll on our reputation.  It may take 2 to 3 years to recover but finally we have someone in Savannah who understands and appears to be willing to make this happen.

New Colonel Is Breaking With Past Practices

We have been watching with the hope that our new Colonel is truly a lake advocate. In the past when our lakes started down there was no attempt to protect recreation until the lakes dropped 4ft. Monday, although the lakes are within a foot of full pool, the Corps is dropping release rates from Lake Thurmond to very near the minimum demonstrated to be acceptable downstream (3800cfs vs 3600cfs).  This is a much appreciated change from past practices where release rates remained unchanged until the lakes dropped 4' and even then release rates from Lake Thurmond were only dropped to 4200cfs.

Up to now we suspected the Corps might be changing to protecting recreation with better level control but there was no way to know for sure because the lakes are always held at a near constant level during spawning season.  As I understand it spawning season is over yet we continue to see an effort to hold our lake levels as high as possible.

I personally would like to thank the Corps hoping this is a true read of their intentions. The sky is the limit as to what this can mean for the growth of this area in a couple of years once the public impression of our lakes improves.

WE ARE ABOUT TO SEE WHAT THE COLONEL MEANS BY LAKE ADVOCATE

We have now entered into the months where recreation really matters.  Our new Colonel has indicated he is a lake advocate and we are about to see what he means by that.  First we assume that means recreation will become a protected entity just as water quality, water supply, fish and wildlife, flood control, and hydro power are.  All of these are responsibilities given to the Corps for running our lake system but in the past recreation has been basically ignored.

When lake levels drop more than 10ft it virtually destroys recreation and the recreational infrastructure.  The reasons are simple.  Vacationers go to other lakes when they see a history of levels this low.  As with anything, when you get burned a few times you avoid that fire.  As a result existing concessionaires who allow access to the lakes go out of business or stop expanding and any further concessionaires who may be looking at providing recreation at our lakes go elsewhere. Additionally the homes built beside the lake become unattractive and real estate values plummet.

When Save Our Lakes Now started looking into how to reverse this situation, we were given a bunch of excuses as to why the Corps could not decrease release rates below guide curve levels.

• first the short nosed sturgeon was endangered and we could not possibly drop below guide curve release rates because they might not find spawning grounds. 
• Then some kind of lily in the Augusta rapids was being eaten by deer when too much rock was exposed. 
• Then we were assured that water quality would become unsatisfactory
• Then we were assured water supply would be too low
• Then we were assured that oxygen supply in the harbor would drop below acceptable levels
• Then we were told the Corps' hands were tied by the various groups such as fish and wildlife who would not allow the corps to drop release rates below guide curve levels.
• We were told SEPA (South Eastern Power Association) insisted on holding to the guide curve release rates.

One by one we have eliminated these excuses but through last year the Corps has refused to change from the published guide curves which were destroying recreation repeatedly.  Without going into great detail we have eliminated all these excuses.  If anyone desires I will be glad to do into detail in a follow up blog but to cover them all would take several pages of explanation which is beyond what we want to do with this blog.

Our picture of what a true lake advocate would do is to drop release rates to 3600cfs, which has been demonstrated time and time again to not have an adverse impact on the environment or water supply etc., anytime the lakes drop below full pool.  Doing so, all the various concerns of the Corps would be met and the lakes should stay within 10ft of full pool thus protecting recreation.  The one remaining issue expressed by the Corps is they would not be able to meet their quotas for power supply.  From talking to SEPA we are part of a much bigger system and seldom are all the lakes in the system in drought so they could make up our lost power from hydropower obtained elsewhere.  Besides, the increased cost of power to the consumer if it comes from somewhere other than hydropower is peanuts compared to the losses to our recreational infrastructure and lack of development of neighboring communities.