Interstate Coordination Mechanisms for the ACF Basin from a Florida Perspective

Proceedings of the 1997 Georgia Water Resources Conference, March 20-22, 1997, Athens, Georgia.The Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-FlintRiver (ACF) Basin has been the locus of ongoing conflict and controversy among the states of Georgia, Alabama and Florida for decades. They, together with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, are now near the end of a comprehensive planning study which provides the opportunity for long-term cooperative agreements. Florida's perspective regarding water use issues is discussed. Any interstate coordination mechanism for the ACF must give adequate recognition to and consideration of Florida's needs for water quality and quantity in the Apalachicola River to maintain its fisheries, recreation and tourism activities.Sponsored and Organized by: U.S. Geological Survey, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, The University of Georgia, Georgia State University, Georgia Institute of TechnologyThis book was published by the Institute of Ecology, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 with partial funding provided by the U.S. Department of Interior, Geological Survey, through the Georgia Water Research Institutes Authorization Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-397). The views and statements advanced in this publication are solely those of the authors and do not represent official views or policies of the University of Georgia or the U.S. Geological Survey or the conference sponsors

Water policies and globalization

Proceedings of the 2003 Georgia Water Resources Conference, held April 23-24, 2003, at the University of Georgia.Earth’s water managers live constantly with inadequate policy directives; most water policy having been formulated years ago, to serve in situations that no longer exist. Policy makers today prefer directing their attention to sexier, more immediate problems than water, despite constant warnings about expanding threats to the planet’s waters. Historically, water policy changes, at any level of government, come slowly. Water managers own a significant share of the fault for this situation. They know, more than any other group, what is needed to protect waters, but for the most part they keep it to themselves. Such policy related threats to water supplies as population growth, urbanization, climate change, and new water borne pollutants are mounting, as the new century wears on. Yet water managers continue to talk only with one another, most often about technology, rather than enter the political fray where policy is made. Now, water managers everywhere face an issue, already of concern to many of them, which will require of them a most active participation in political affairs. This issue, the privatization of water supplies, is being exacerbated by another matter; globalization, which itself is causing great disquiet among many of the world’s citizens, including water managers. Both privatization and globalization are issues that need to be addressed immediately, at many levels of government, by significant changes in state, national and global water policy

Effects of Irrigation Withdrawals in the Dougherty Plain on Base-Flow in the Apalachicola River

Proceedings of the 1993 Georgia Water Resources Conference, April 20-21, 1993, Athens, Georgia.Maintenance of the base-flow of the Apalachicola River is important to the ecological functioning of its floodplain and estuary and for the provision of a federally authorized navigation project. This paper analyzes the impacts of irrigation activities in the lower Flint basin on base-flow of the Apalachicola River.Sponsored and Organized by: U.S. Geological Survey, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, The University of Georgia, Georgia State University, Georgia Institute of TechnologyThis book was published by the Institute of Natural Resources, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 with partial funding provided by the U.S. Department of Interior, Geological Survey, through the Georgia Water Research Institute as authorized by the Water Resources Research Act of 1984 (P.L. 98-242). The views and statements advanced in this publication are solely those of the authors and do not represent official views or policies of the University of Georgia or the U.S. Geological Survey or the conference sponsors