Skip to main content
Home› Off Topic
yea! supreme court does us a good
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday gave Florida another chance to make its case that Georgia uses too much water and in doing so damages the Apalachicola River and Bay.The justices' 5-4 ruling extends an already long-running dispute between the two states. The fight is over Georgia's use of water from the Chattahoochee and Flint rivers that serve booming metro Atlanta and Georgia's agricultural industry.The court said that a special master appointed to hear the lawsuit should reconsider Florida's argument that limiting how much water Georgia uses would provide more for the Apalachicola River that flows into Apalachicola Bay and the nearby Gulf of Mexico.
"Five of us believe that the special master, as Florida said, did apply too strict a standard and that under a proper standard, Florida did adequately show that relief may be possible," Justice Stephen Breyer said in announcing the opinion. "We hold that the master should go on to make further factual findings in the case, such as whether Georgia is, in fact, using too much Flint River water, and if so, whether Florida could benefit significantly from a cap on Georgia's use of that water.". http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/politics/political-pulse/os-supreme-court-florida-georgia-water-war-20180627-story.html
TAKE THAT GEORGIA!
Buy Digital Single Issues
Don't miss an issue.
Buy Single Digital Issue
on the Florida Sportsman App
Buy single digital issue for your phone or tablet.
More You May Be Interested In
And then whine about the price of oysters.
Looks like he's saying the rules governing the operation of the Corp of Engineers need to be addressed.
From the Special Masters report.
Much more could be said and would need to be said on these issues (as well as other issues, such as causation) were Florida and Georgia the only parties whose activities were implicated in this action. However, they are not. As already described, the Corps also conducts significant operations in the Basin. Regardless of the harm suffered by Florida and the unreasonableness of Georgia’s agricultural water use, it is necessary to determine whether the activities of the Corps render uncertain any relief to Florida stemming from a Court decree capping Georgia’s consumptive water use. It is to this issue that I now turn.
The evidence presented at trial suggests that the Corps’ reservoir operations are a significant, and perhaps the primary, factor influencing the amount of streamflow crossing the state line during times of drought and low flows. The Corps has the ability to store streamflow above 5,000 cfs during dry periods. Unless the Corps’ rules are changed, therefore, increased inflow into the reservoir system will not necessarily pass downstream to Florida during these times. Further, while the Corps may choose to release more than the minimum releases specified in the RIOP, there is no way to predict how the Corps will exercise its discretion in the event of increased local inflows into Lake Seminole. It may release additional water from Jim Woodruff Dam, or it may store additional water in its upstream reservoirs. Florida has not proven by clear and convincing evidence that any decree entered in this case will provide relief at the most critical dry periods. Rather, it appears likely that ensuring relief for Florida during these times would require modification of the rules governing the Corps’ reservoir operations and, hence, active participation by the Corps in this proceeding.
"Winners take responsibility, losers blame others"