|
|
|
| Authored by: rcsteiner on Sunday, April 21 2013 @ 12:03 AM EDT |
Speaking as a fairly recent Georgia resident (moved from MN 8 years ago) who has
become familiar over the last few years with this area of the country and the
GA/AL/FL water wars, I think a lot of the issue is simply territorial
posturing.
Alabama has plenty of water and seems to fight ANY change at all in Georgia that
impacts water flowing into AL ... even the building of new water reservoirs to
attempt to mitigate periods of (relatively) low rainfall is fought in the courts
at every turn.
It's very frustrating from a GA point of view, since the water in question is
mainly coming from rain that falls inside GA, and since the water that flows
into AL would be far less subject to the sort of harmful variation AL seems so
concerned about on paper if those reservoirs were to be built. I really don't
grok their position.
Florida's position makes more sense to me in some ways, since the main issue in
FL is the continued maintenance of certain wildlife areas which require fairly
constant water flow to maintain water levels, but I'm not convinced that the
former natural state (before European settlement) has any similarity to the
currently regulated state on which those habitats seemingly depend.
If either downstream state actually had some sort of water shortage, I would be
a lot more sympathetic. As far as I am aware, neither one does.
---
-Rich Steiner >>>---> Mableton, GA USA
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
