1/20: Tri-state water wars

Moderated by Tom Sabulis

A federal appeals court gave Georgia a victory last year in the tri-state water wars when it ruled that Lake Lanier could be used for metro Atlanta’s drinking water. Alabama and Florida disagree. Alabama plans to petition the U.S. Supreme Court next month to review the case.

Today, an Alabama attorney explains why. And a Georgia district leader suggests a different approach. What do you think?

15 comments Add your comment

JG

January 22nd, 2012
11:48 am

Georgis, Alabama, and Florida have received tremendous benefit from the storage provided in Lake Lanier. It would be a disaster in Atlanta and downstream all the way to the Gulf of Mexico if flows were restored to their “historical ammounts.” Just as Atlanta reaps the benefits of the storage in Lake Lanier, Alabama reaps the benefits of the storage in TVA lakes for its numerous municipal, industrial, and thermoelectric withdrawals from the Tennessee River.

Hillbilly D

January 20th, 2012
6:56 pm

LC

Go back and read the newspapers of the day. Some of us lived here then and remember.

LC

January 20th, 2012
6:14 pm

Thank you, Rain Man or Hillbilly D. I think I’ll rely on what the federal appeals court said in their ruling over the Farmer’s Almanac

Hillbilly D

January 20th, 2012
4:34 pm

Lake Lanier was originially built for navigation and flood control. And they originally wanted to build it near Morgan Falls but Atlanta leaders didn’t want to give up that valuable real estate, so they moved it up to near Buford.

Intown

January 20th, 2012
11:51 am

Vagabund: That “aquifer” is the source of base flow for the Flint and Apalachicola rivers. And metro Atlanta is asked to make up the difference for the water they take out of the “aquifer” to irrigate crops on marginal land. So, they ain’t so innocent down there in Apalchicola, East Alabama or SW Georgia. They too are using a resource that impacts everyone.