ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS SUE CORPS OVER RESERVOIR PERMITS

January 22, 2003, Atlanta— A new dam and 1,500-acre reservoir proposed in Henry and Butts counties that would destroy hundreds of acres of wetlands, flood almost 20 miles of free-flowing stream, and reduce downstream flow should not be built without a thorough study of the combined impacts from the multiple reservoirs that have been built or proposed in north Georgia over the past decade, environmental groups said in a lawsuit filed today in federal court. This would be the fourth reservoir built in Henry County alone in the last 15 years, and one of 17 currently planned for north Georgia.

"Allowing this major new reservoir without looking at it in the context of all the other proposed reservoirs is like buying a new car without looking at your bank account," said David Farren, an attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, a non-profit regional organization with an office in Atlanta. The law center filed the suit on behalf of Georgia River Network and the Altamaha Riverkeeper. Julie Mayfield with the Turner Environmental Law Clinic is co-counsel.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for Northern Georgia, claims the Corps violated the federal National Environmental Policy Act by failing to conduct an "environmental impact statement" required for projects of this magnitude, and instead doing only a cursory environmental review that did not fully consider the impacts of the project or viable alternatives. Moreover, the groups say the Corps' individual reviews of other reservoirs proposed in north Georgia ( there are currently 17 in the planning pipeline ( is illegal because it ignores the compound effects of multiple reservoirs in the same river basins. They are calling on the Corps to conduct an overall, comprehensive study, known under the Act as a "programmatic environmental impact statement."

"While local governments have a responsibility to provide clean and dependable water for their citizens, the Corps has the responsibility to closely examine these projects from a larger context to find water supply solutions that benefit communities, taxpayers and the environment," said Ellen Sutherland, executive director of Georgia River Network.

The prolonged drought, in conjunction with rampant growth in north Georgia, has put Georgia's water resources under extreme pressure, forcing the state to finally begin comprehensive, long-range water management planning. In the meantime, however, counties are going directly to the Corps for permission to build reservoirs to meet short-term water needs and to spur new growth.

The rush to build reservoirs without regional planning and coordination will likely result in excess water capacity in rural areas, exacerbating the significant sprawl problems in much of northern and central Georgia, the groups say. Hence, adding reservoirs will have ramifications for development patterns, air quality and wetlands that extend beyond the health of any one stream or river basin.

Dams and reservoirs make a profound and lasting imprint on the environment. Because they interfere with the natural cycles of a flowing river, they dramatically alter the chemical and physical characteristics of riverine habitat upstream and downstream, often cutting off wildlife from food sources and breeding grounds. According to a study conducted this year by the River Basin Science and Policy Center at the University of Georgia, reservoirs:

• Increase water loss from a river system through evaporation
• Decrease a river's ability to assimilate waste, causing downstream water quality degradation
• Create uninhabitable conditions for native fish both in the reservoir and downstream
• Impede movement of migratory species and prevent natural recolonization of streams by other species after droughts or other catastrophic events
• Reduce or eliminate the contribution of floodplain forests to water quality and habitat.

"Given the dramatic impacts of dams and reservoirs, and the sheer number being considered in north Georgia, this issue extends all the way down the Altamaha to the coast," said Deborah Sheppard of the Altamaha Riverkeeper, who noted that commercial and recreational fishermen have expressed concern about the proliferation of dams and reservoirs in north Georgia. The Altamaha delta is responsible for over a third of Georgia's commercial seafood catch. The effects of lower river flows and increasing salinity in the estuary already have taken their toll and the value of the catch has fallen considerably in recent years. Local governments and business leaders downstream are also showing increased concern about the impact of new reservoirs upstream, Sheppard said.

The Altamaha was named the 7th most endangered river in 2002 by American Rivers, which ranked U.S. rivers according to their ecological significance, and the magnitude of environmental threats. The group identified multiple proposed drinking-water supply reservoirs and power plants in the Altamaha watershed as threatening to create an "artificial state of permanent drought in the river basin."

In official comment letters to the Corps regarding the Tussahaw permit, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service both expressed multiple concerns about the project and the lack of a full environmental study. Further, both agencies recommended a programmatic review of the environmental impact of the many reservoirs now proposed in north Georgia's watersheds.

The EPA strongly urged preparation of a full environmental impact statement for the Tussahaw reservoir, noting Henry County's inadequate wetlands mitigations plans and incomplete analysis of negative impacts and alternatives. Out of 19 alternatives to the Tussahaw project that were considered, the county included no conservation measures whatsoever. The EPA also expressed conern about water quality downstream of the proposed reservoir. "We noted that at times of low flow, which were frequent in 2000, there was 90 cfs less flow at the Macon U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) gage than at the Jackson gage, despite a 58% increase in the size of the watershed. ... The low flow in the Ocmulgee River at Macon seriously impacted Macon's drinking water withdrawal, prompting the City to request a permit for a low head dam across the river to facilitate their intake. This extraordinary action highlights the need for comprehensive management of water resources in the Upper Ocmulgee watershed. Thus, there should be a high level of environmental documentation for any new project that has the potential to impact water quality, aquatic habitat and human uses. The [Authority's] application does not provide this level of information."

"It's understandable that localities are anxious about water supplies, but this is a regional problem that demands that we work together to find solutions that will not harm the environment," said Julie Mayfield of the Turner Environmental Law Clinic.