|
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Oct 17, 5:09 pm, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 19:56:44 -0000, wrote: On Oct 17, 3:33 pm, John H. wrote: On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:04:57 -0000, wrote: On Oct 16, 7:48 pm, John H. wrote: On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 21:30:58 -0000, wrote: On Oct 16, 4:56 pm, John H. wrote: On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:48:11 -0000, wrote: On Oct 16, 1:58 pm, "CalifBill" wrote: wrote in message oups.com... On Oct 15, 8:34 pm, "CalifBill" wrote: wrote in message roups.com... On Oct 15, 10:13 am, wrote: On Oct 15, 10:06 am, "Don White" wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... CNN had a feature on Lake Lanier this morning. Apparently water levels are way, way down, and if there isn't some serious protracted rain soon, a goodly portion of Georgia will be facing drought. Meanwhile, the video showed the shorelines of the lake line with dead shellfish and fish, left behind as the water receded. What's the impact on boating? Good thing Waylon doesn't boat much. Shouldn't affect him. Is Lanier a man made lake? Yes, it's dammed. It's big, though, 900 miles of shoreline, at least when it was full, it's down about 12' now. The good thing is it's deep. It is not deep if 12' decrease puts it in the condition it is in. Deep in California is like Oroville. Down 200' and still parts of the lake are 400' deep.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Deep is a relative term, dip****. Relative to you deep****.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Okay, I'll give you an out, Mr. Brilliant. If "deep" is NOT a relative term, then how much IS "deep"? While you were gone, it wasn't totally peaceful around here, but it wasn't too bad. Someone thought you may have been ill. It appears you weren't. But, would you consider going back to wherever you were, even if it was PICKING BOOGERS!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Why the insults, John, I thought you were working toward group harmony? Why is it that you do as you want, but if someone else does exactly the same thing, you whine like a baby? Actually, the group was in a state of relative harmony before the return of your illustrious self.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Why dodge the questions, John? Question answered.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Uh, there was more than one question, John. In case you're having trouble, but appear to be willing to answer, I'll break the paragraph down for you, okay? The first question was, "why the insults"? Because you deserved them. Second question was, "why is it that you do what you want, but when someone else does exactly the same thing, you whine like a little baby"? Haven't whined.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Oh, so if I think someone "deserves" it, then I can go ahead and insult them, huh? Thanks, you dumb ass! |
Lake Lanier drying up?
John H. wrote:
"The Corps says it is just executing the law: it is required to keep the flow of water coming to two federally-protected species of freshwater mussels and a small coal-fired power plant in Florida. Moreover, other federally-controlled reservoirs are depleted, so it has to come from Lanier." I wonder what green shirted tree hugger got the law passed in the first place. The Corps of Engineers does not make laws. Nor can it decide which laws to obey and which to forget. Perhaps it's time to get the Algore folks on the hill involved. Oh, wait, they'd be all for the mussels, not the people of Atlanta. The Corp has started the process to update their water management plan: http://isakson.senate.gov/press/2007/101207water.htm |
Lake Lanier drying up?
wrote:
On Oct 19, 12:12 am, trainfan1 wrote: wrote: On Oct 17, 9:42 pm, trainfan1 wrote: wrote: On Oct 16, 11:03 pm, trainfan1 wrote: wrote: On Oct 15, 9:25 pm, trainfan1 wrote: HK wrote: JimH wrote: "HK" wrote in message . .. Jack Redington wrote: HK wrote: CNN had a feature on Lake Lanier this morning. Apparently water levels are way, way down, and if there isn't some serious protracted rain soon, a goodly portion of Georgia will be facing drought. Meanwhile, the video showed the shorelines of the lake line with dead shellfish and fish, left behind as the water receded. What's the impact on boating? While I no longer boat on Lanier, from the news many ramps are closed. At the present time that lake is about 12 below full pool. At least that was the last time I checked. Projections do not look good. Georgia has been in drought conditions all of this year. Spring rains were slight and every month has been a short. So it is not really news anymore. Lanier has several problems when rain is short. For one the drainage basin is small for a lake it's size. And about 6 million people in the Atlanta area depend on it. There is also the fact this this lake is under the Army Corps managment. At present they are letting out about twice the amount of water that is coming in. This has alot to do with the tri-state water war that has been going on since I have been here (about 10 years) The Corps has stated that they are keeping the discharge rate as it is to protect some shellfish that need it in in Florida. That being where the water hit the ocean. Alabama also uses/needs this water. Thus the tri-state angle on the water resources war. As far as impact on boating - Some ramps are closed and there are hazzards to navigation that would not normally exist. But that is what happens when water gets lower them normal. If you are really interested: http://lanier.sam.usace.army.mil/Pre...07_BoatersCaut... Capt Jack R.. I was looking earlier for a current aerial or low satellite photo of the lake, but then I was distracted by work. With all the dead marine life now on the edges of the lake, there must be an insect and rat problem. I don't pay attention to Atlanta weather patterns. Is there a winter rainy season? If not, then the city may be reduced to Homeland Security bringing in water trucks. Not from our Lakes.........the Great Lakes.....the largest amount of fresh water in the world and quite a resource for the Canadians and Americans living close enough to enjoy the Lakes. Let Lanier dry up. After all, it is nothing more than a recreational lake.........correct? First and foremost, I believe, it is a reservoir. No. Flood Control. Rob- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - From Lake Lanier Army Corp of Engineers website: Constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the 1950's, Lake Lanier is a multi-purpose lake that provides for flood protection, power production, water supply, navigation, recreation and fish and wildlife management. In that order. Flood control first. Water supply is down the list. Rob- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Who ever told you that it's in that order?? The power generated at Lake Lanier, which in your order is #2, is very little, Correct - drinking water supply is below power generation in priority, which is below flood control in priority. You got it right! Since the lake's construction, metro Atlanta has been taking water from the lake to use for municipal drinking water, which was only authorized by Congress as an INCIDENTAL use, secondary to hydroelectricity. The lake's original and authorized purposes were to provide hydroelectricity and flood control. Who told you any different? Rob Where did you get this information from? It surely isn't from the Army Corp of Engineers, who operate the system! See: http://lanier.sam.usace.army.mil/ Nowhere on that site will you see one single reason above all others for the construction of the lake. There are several reasons, none of which is paramount over any other. Google is your friend... but I'll go with the order of importance your reference presents: http://lanier.sam.usace.army.mil/purposes.htm The "major function" is flood control. Indicating 50% for flood control. I can't find any reference that puts it any other way. You say they don't produce much hydro power there. I'll go along with that too. Rob- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Need to really find out? http://corpslakes.usace.army.mil/vis...cfm?Id=K502200 which simply calls it a simply "multipurpose" without identifying any one particular reason over another: "Constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the 1950 s, Lake Lanier is a multi-purpose lake that provides for flood protection, power production, water supply, navigation, recreation and fish and wildlife management. Lake Lanier is one of 464 lakes in 43 states constructed and operated by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. It has won the best operated lake of the year award in 1990, 1997 and 2002." Assuming this paragraph is mil spec, the purposes are listed in order of decreasing importance. I'll accept that too. I really don't know any more than you on this, but flood control comes up first in every reference. Power production wasn't a priority in 1950, & water supply for that region was certainly lower in priority than power in 1950. One interesting point made is that it took 3 years, 1956 to 1959, to reach full pool... even w/o modern demands. Lanier is in trouble. Rob |
Lake Lanier drying up?
John H. wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:52:59 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: John H. wrote: "The Corps says it is just executing the law: it is required to keep the flow of water coming to two federally-protected species of freshwater mussels and a small coal-fired power plant in Florida. Moreover, other federally-controlled reservoirs are depleted, so it has to come from Lanier." I wonder what green shirted tree hugger got the law passed in the first place. The Corps of Engineers does not make laws. Nor can it decide which laws to obey and which to forget. Perhaps it's time to get the Algore folks on the hill involved. Oh, wait, they'd be all for the mussels, not the people of Atlanta. The Corp has started the process to update their water management plan: http://isakson.senate.gov/press/2007/101207water.htm "However, Geren gave his commitment to the senators that if and when mediation broke down and was not making progress, he would begin the update of the water control manuals." Doesn't sound like they've started anything yet. I'll bet it will still take an act of Congress to change the law. At least a Senator is working on the problem, but who is looking after the poor little baby mussels? Not to worry. As soon as some contractor buddy of the administration wires in a way to fleece the taxpayers, all will be resolved. |
Lake Lanier drying up?
HK wrote:
John H. wrote: On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:52:59 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: John H. wrote: "The Corps says it is just executing the law: it is required to keep the flow of water coming to two federally-protected species of freshwater mussels and a small coal-fired power plant in Florida. Moreover, other federally-controlled reservoirs are depleted, so it has to come from Lanier." I wonder what green shirted tree hugger got the law passed in the first place. The Corps of Engineers does not make laws. Nor can it decide which laws to obey and which to forget. Perhaps it's time to get the Algore folks on the hill involved. Oh, wait, they'd be all for the mussels, not the people of Atlanta. The Corp has started the process to update their water management plan: http://isakson.senate.gov/press/2007/101207water.htm "However, Geren gave his commitment to the senators that if and when mediation broke down and was not making progress, he would begin the update of the water control manuals." Doesn't sound like they've started anything yet. I'll bet it will still take an act of Congress to change the law. At least a Senator is working on the problem, but who is looking after the poor little baby mussels? Not to worry. As soon as some contractor buddy of the administration wires in a way to fleece the taxpayers, all will be resolved. I am wiring the money in as we speak |
Lake Lanier drying up?
|
Lake Lanier drying up?
|
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:52:59 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote: John H. wrote: "The Corps says it is just executing the law: it is required to keep the flow of water coming to two federally-protected species of freshwater mussels and a small coal-fired power plant in Florida. Moreover, other federally-controlled reservoirs are depleted, so it has to come from Lanier." I wonder what green shirted tree hugger got the law passed in the first place. The Corps of Engineers does not make laws. Nor can it decide which laws to obey and which to forget. Perhaps it's time to get the Algore folks on the hill involved. Oh, wait, they'd be all for the mussels, not the people of Atlanta. The Corp has started the process to update their water management plan: http://isakson.senate.gov/press/2007/101207water.htm "However, Geren gave his commitment to the senators that if and when mediation broke down and was not making progress, he would begin the update of the water control manuals." Doesn't sound like they've started anything yet. I'll bet it will still take an act of Congress to change the law. At least a Senator is working on the problem, but who is looking after the poor little baby mussels? |
Lake Lanier drying up?
trainfan1 wrote:
One interesting point made is that it took 3 years, 1956 to 1959, to reach full pool... even w/o modern demands. Lanier is in trouble. On Fri, 19 Oct 07, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: If they had a year of normal rain, the lake could be back to full levels in a year. While this is the lowest level, we have had other years when it was very low. So.... did Atlanta/Lake Lanier get drenched last night? The radar I was watching just showed state lines and it was hard to tell. Looked like the rain storms may have past to the south of them. But I haven't heard word one from anybody who actually lives there. If that storm missed them, they really missed a deluge (we got drenched here on the Gulf Coast and then sent it on up their way). Rick |
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Oct 19, 9:56 am, trainfan1 wrote:
wrote: On Oct 19, 12:12 am, trainfan1 wrote: wrote: On Oct 17, 9:42 pm, trainfan1 wrote: wrote: On Oct 16, 11:03 pm, trainfan1 wrote: wrote: On Oct 15, 9:25 pm, trainfan1 wrote: HK wrote: JimH wrote: "HK" wrote in message news:DLqdnUOpmOY9cY7anZ2dnUVZ_i2dnZ2d@co mcast.com... Jack Redington wrote: HK wrote: CNN had a feature on Lake Lanier this morning. Apparently water levels are way, way down, and if there isn't some serious protracted rain soon, a goodly portion of Georgia will be facing drought. Meanwhile, the video showed the shorelines of the lake line with dead shellfish and fish, left behind as the water receded. What's the impact on boating? While I no longer boat on Lanier, from the news many ramps are closed. At the present time that lake is about 12 below full pool. At least that was the last time I checked. Projections do not look good. Georgia has been in drought conditions all of this year. Spring rains were slight and every month has been a short. So it is not really news anymore. Lanier has several problems when rain is short. For one the drainage basin is small for a lake it's size. And about 6 million people in the Atlanta area depend on it. There is also the fact this this lake is under the Army Corps managment. At present they are letting out about twice the amount of water that is coming in. This has alot to do with the tri-state water war that has been going on since I have been here (about 10 years) The Corps has stated that they are keeping the discharge rate as it is to protect some shellfish that need it in in Florida. That being where the water hit the ocean. Alabama also uses/needs this water. Thus the tri-state angle on the water resources war. As far as impact on boating - Some ramps are closed and there are hazzards to navigation that would not normally exist. But that is what happens when water gets lower them normal. If you are really interested: http://lanier.sam.usace.army.mil/Pre...07_BoatersCaut... Capt Jack R.. I was looking earlier for a current aerial or low satellite photo of the lake, but then I was distracted by work. With all the dead marine life now on the edges of the lake, there must be an insect and rat problem. I don't pay attention to Atlanta weather patterns. Is there a winter rainy season? If not, then the city may be reduced to Homeland Security bringing in water trucks. Not from our Lakes.........the Great Lakes.....the largest amount of fresh water in the world and quite a resource for the Canadians and Americans living close enough to enjoy the Lakes. Let Lanier dry up. After all, it is nothing more than a recreational lake.........correct? First and foremost, I believe, it is a reservoir. No. Flood Control. Rob- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - From Lake Lanier Army Corp of Engineers website: Constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the 1950's, Lake Lanier is a multi-purpose lake that provides for flood protection, power production, water supply, navigation, recreation and fish and wildlife management. In that order. Flood control first. Water supply is down the list. Rob- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Who ever told you that it's in that order?? The power generated at Lake Lanier, which in your order is #2, is very little, Correct - drinking water supply is below power generation in priority, which is below flood control in priority. You got it right! Since the lake's construction, metro Atlanta has been taking water from the lake to use for municipal drinking water, which was only authorized by Congress as an INCIDENTAL use, secondary to hydroelectricity. The lake's original and authorized purposes were to provide hydroelectricity and flood control. Who told you any different? Rob Where did you get this information from? It surely isn't from the Army Corp of Engineers, who operate the system! See: http://lanier.sam.usace.army.mil/ Nowhere on that site will you see one single reason above all others for the construction of the lake. There are several reasons, none of which is paramount over any other. Google is your friend... but I'll go with the order of importance your reference presents: http://lanier.sam.usace.army.mil/purposes.htm The "major function" is flood control. Indicating 50% for flood control. I can't find any reference that puts it any other way. You say they don't produce much hydro power there. I'll go along with that too. Rob- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Need to really find out? http://corpslakes.usace.army.mil/vis...cfm?Id=K502200 which simply calls it a simply "multipurpose" without identifying any one particular reason over another: "Constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the 1950 s, Lake Lanier is a multi-purpose lake that provides for flood protection, power production, water supply, navigation, recreation and fish and wildlife management. Lake Lanier is one of 464 lakes in 43 states constructed and operated by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. It has won the best operated lake of the year award in 1990, 1997 and 2002." Assuming this paragraph is mil spec, the purposes are listed in order of decreasing importance. I'll accept that too. I really don't know any more than you on this, but flood control comes up first in every reference. Power production wasn't a priority in 1950, & water supply for that region was certainly lower in priority than power in 1950. One interesting point made is that it took 3 years, 1956 to 1959, to reach full pool... even w/o modern demands. Lanier is in trouble. Rob- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Oh, Absolutely! They are saying that it is possible to go below "conservation pool", but if that happens, then because of those modern demands, it will never recover. |
Lake Lanier drying up?
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "BillP" wrote in message news:bAWRi.15739$fm1.5569@trnddc01... It's a theory, and the name of an organization which, for many years, has tried to push an agenda of not having more than 2 kids, so a couple only replaces itself without adding population. Naturally, there are people who think its inevitable that suggestions will become laws, and such people refuse to think about controlling population growth. I wonder if Paul Ehrlich (the original Algore) is still with them. Some of his "predictions"- You are correct. All resources are infinite, and it doesn't matter how many people tap these resources. This is physically impossible, but if you're stupid enough (like you), anything's possible. Where did I say all resources are finite? |
Lake Lanier drying up?
"BillP" wrote in message
news:bAWRi.15739$fm1.5569@trnddc01... "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "John H." wrote in message ... On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:54:51 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "John H." wrote in message m... On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:54:02 -0700, Chuck Gould wrote: On Oct 15, 7:44?am, wrote: So then you must agree it is OK to alter the course of nature in order to serve the growing human population?- Hide quoted text - Careful, that statement is getting pretty close to recognizing the possibility that a growing human population *could* "alter the course of nature". Then slowing down the rate of growth may be a cost effective way of dealing with the problem, as opposed to making Al Gore more wealthy? It would be impossible for it NOT to help, but it's a touchy subject. Zero population growth? Watch the reactions to that in subsequent messages. The emphasis was on cost effective means of dealing with a problem, as opposed to sending money to Al Gore. 'Zero population gowth' is your term, not mine. I'm not trying to engender any reaction to that in any messages. But, it looks like you are. It's a theory, and the name of an organization which, for many years, has tried to push an agenda of not having more than 2 kids, so a couple only replaces itself without adding population. Naturally, there are people who think its inevitable that suggestions will become laws, and such people refuse to think about controlling population growth. I wonder if Paul Ehrlich (the original Algore) is still with them. Some of his "predictions"- "The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s the world will undergo famines . . . hundreds of millions of people (including Americans) are going to starve to death." (Population Bomb 1968) "Smog disasters" in 1973 might kill 200,000 people in New York and Los Angeles. (1969) "I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000." (1969) "Before 1985, mankind will enter a genuine age of scarcity . . . in which the accessible supplies of many key minerals will be facing depletion." (1976) "By 1985 enough millions will have died to reduce the earth's population to some acceptable level, like 1.5 billion people." (1969) "By 1980 the United States would see its life expectancy drop to 42 because of pesticides, and by 1999 its population would drop to 22.6 million." (1969) I read between the lines. You made it easy. |
Lake Lanier drying up?
|
Lake Lanier drying up?
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "BillP" wrote in message news:bAWRi.15739$fm1.5569@trnddc01... "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "John H." wrote in message ... On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:54:51 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "John H." wrote in message om... On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:54:02 -0700, Chuck Gould wrote: On Oct 15, 7:44?am, wrote: So then you must agree it is OK to alter the course of nature in order to serve the growing human population?- Hide quoted text - Careful, that statement is getting pretty close to recognizing the possibility that a growing human population *could* "alter the course of nature". Then slowing down the rate of growth may be a cost effective way of dealing with the problem, as opposed to making Al Gore more wealthy? It would be impossible for it NOT to help, but it's a touchy subject. Zero population growth? Watch the reactions to that in subsequent messages. The emphasis was on cost effective means of dealing with a problem, as opposed to sending money to Al Gore. 'Zero population gowth' is your term, not mine. I'm not trying to engender any reaction to that in any messages. But, it looks like you are. It's a theory, and the name of an organization which, for many years, has tried to push an agenda of not having more than 2 kids, so a couple only replaces itself without adding population. Naturally, there are people who think its inevitable that suggestions will become laws, and such people refuse to think about controlling population growth. I wonder if Paul Ehrlich (the original Algore) is still with them. Some of his "predictions"- "The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s the world will undergo famines . . . hundreds of millions of people (including Americans) are going to starve to death." (Population Bomb 1968) "Smog disasters" in 1973 might kill 200,000 people in New York and Los Angeles. (1969) "I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000." (1969) "Before 1985, mankind will enter a genuine age of scarcity . . . in which the accessible supplies of many key minerals will be facing depletion." (1976) "By 1985 enough millions will have died to reduce the earth's population to some acceptable level, like 1.5 billion people." (1969) "By 1980 the United States would see its life expectancy drop to 42 because of pesticides, and by 1999 its population would drop to 22.6 million." (1969) I read between the lines. You made it easy. You should really try to absorb and understand what is on the lines before attempting to read between them. |
Lake Lanier drying up?
"BillP" wrote in message
news:gv4Si.5$uE4.0@trnddc07... "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "BillP" wrote in message news:bAWRi.15739$fm1.5569@trnddc01... "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "John H." wrote in message ... On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:54:51 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "John H." wrote in message news:9ld7h39i97qjuuk6ftp61c7n1b0gt6m63e@4ax. com... On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:54:02 -0700, Chuck Gould wrote: On Oct 15, 7:44?am, wrote: So then you must agree it is OK to alter the course of nature in order to serve the growing human population?- Hide quoted text - Careful, that statement is getting pretty close to recognizing the possibility that a growing human population *could* "alter the course of nature". Then slowing down the rate of growth may be a cost effective way of dealing with the problem, as opposed to making Al Gore more wealthy? It would be impossible for it NOT to help, but it's a touchy subject. Zero population growth? Watch the reactions to that in subsequent messages. The emphasis was on cost effective means of dealing with a problem, as opposed to sending money to Al Gore. 'Zero population gowth' is your term, not mine. I'm not trying to engender any reaction to that in any messages. But, it looks like you are. It's a theory, and the name of an organization which, for many years, has tried to push an agenda of not having more than 2 kids, so a couple only replaces itself without adding population. Naturally, there are people who think its inevitable that suggestions will become laws, and such people refuse to think about controlling population growth. I wonder if Paul Ehrlich (the original Algore) is still with them. Some of his "predictions"- "The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s the world will undergo famines . . . hundreds of millions of people (including Americans) are going to starve to death." (Population Bomb 1968) "Smog disasters" in 1973 might kill 200,000 people in New York and Los Angeles. (1969) "I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000." (1969) "Before 1985, mankind will enter a genuine age of scarcity . . . in which the accessible supplies of many key minerals will be facing depletion." (1976) "By 1985 enough millions will have died to reduce the earth's population to some acceptable level, like 1.5 billion people." (1969) "By 1980 the United States would see its life expectancy drop to 42 because of pesticides, and by 1999 its population would drop to 22.6 million." (1969) I read between the lines. You made it easy. You should really try to absorb and understand what is on the lines before attempting to read between them. Ehrlich was a bit of a nut, but it doesn't change the simple mathematical fact that population growth can become unsustainable at some point. I thought you were contesting that fact. |
Lake Lanier drying up?
PhantMan wrote:
So.... did Atlanta/Lake Lanier get drenched last night? "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: no, just a little shower That sucks :-( |
Lake Lanier drying up?
wrote in message
... On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:04:29 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: Ehrlich was a bit of a nut, but it doesn't change the simple mathematical fact that population growth can become unsustainable at some point. I thought you were contesting that fact. War is nature's way of limiting population. A small nuclear war would fix all of these global warming problems and skim off a significant amount of the overpopulation. That might happen if we got serious about forcing India and China into Kyoto. BURP. Pass the Combos. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5hFw2SA1Bs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zr8hmrxkX0c |
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 11:41:14 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 12:05:56 -0000, wrote: On Oct 19, 1:56 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "BillP" wrote in message news:bAWRi.15739$fm1.5569@trnddc01... It's a theory, and the name of an organization which, for many years, has tried to push an agenda of not having more than 2 kids, so a couple only replaces itself without adding population. Naturally, there are people who think its inevitable that suggestions will become laws, and such people refuse to think about controlling population growth. I wonder if Paul Ehrlich (the original Algore) is still with them. Some of his "predictions"- You are correct. All resources are infinite, and it doesn't matter how many people tap these resources. This is physically impossible, but if you're stupid enough (like you), anything's possible. You are correct, there is no middle of the road or even common sense to be had.. It's only doom and gloom, we are in for a global freeze..ooooops, wrong election cycle... Sorry. I am not really a doom and gloomer but I will agree with those who say we will run out of cheap water long before we run out of cheap oil. It will mostly affect people who insist on pretty green lawns first. Here in Florida there are already people who are finding there is so much salt in their well water that it is killing their pretty Floritam. Our wells are still considered "OK" where I am but the salt can be 1 PPT in the winter. That means you get a gram of salt in a liter of water if you don't run it through an RO. Another good reason to start building some nuclear plants. Desalinization may be in our future. http://www.iepsac.org/papers/p09a03.htm |
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Oct 19, 11:42 am, wrote:
trainfan1 wrote: One interesting point made is that it took 3 years, 1956 to 1959, to reach full pool... even w/o modern demands. Lanier is in trouble. On Fri, 19 Oct 07, "Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote: If they had a year of normal rain, the lake could be back to full levels in a year. While this is the lowest level, we have had other years when it was very low. So.... did Atlanta/Lake Lanier get drenched last night? The radar I was watching just showed state lines and it was hard to tell. Looked like the rain storms may have past to the south of them. But I haven't heard word one from anybody who actually lives there. If that storm missed them, they really missed a deluge (we got drenched here on the Gulf Coast and then sent it on up their way). Rick No. Not much rain at all, most of it well south of Atlanta. |
Lake Lanier drying up?
|
Lake Lanier drying up?
|
Lake Lanier drying up?
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
John H. wrote: "The Corps says it is just executing the law: it is required to keep the flow of water coming to two federally-protected species of freshwater mussels and a small coal-fired power plant in Florida. Moreover, other federally-controlled reservoirs are depleted, so it has to come from Lanier." I wonder what green shirted tree hugger got the law passed in the first place. The Corps of Engineers does not make laws. Nor can it decide which laws to obey and which to forget. Perhaps it's time to get the Algore folks on the hill involved. Oh, wait, they'd be all for the mussels, not the people of Atlanta. The Corp has started the process to update their water management plan: http://isakson.senate.gov/press/2007/101207water.htm I just hope there is water to manage when the new plan is finished. Capt Jack R.. |
Lake Lanier drying up?
|
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:25:36 -0400, Jack Redington wrote:
And I agree, the corp is going to keep doing this even though it really does not make any sense to me. Where I live they pull water from Lanier. I guess when the place is dry they will stop :-( Apparently, it's headed to court. Just today, I heard someone is suing the Corps about water flows and Georgia reservoirs. I was just a news blurb that I caught, so I have no specifics. |
Lake Lanier drying up?
|
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Oct 20, 9:03 am, Tim wrote:
This DOES look bad! http://news.aol.com/story/_a/officia...s-in-atlanta/2... Ok, I have only been watching what I see on the news but is the corps still blowing water out the dams for no apparant reason (as they have suggested in some reports)? And as this lake gets smaller, and the story and visuals get bigger, does it serve to help the Global taxing crowd prove their points? |
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 06:03:23 -0700, Tim wrote:
This DOES look bad! http://news.aol.com/story/_a/officia...9214109990001? ncid=NWS00010000000001 Yes it does. I wish all the locals luck. Maybe a very wet, low wind, hurricane? Here, we have had several, fortunately minor, droughts. Some people just don't seem to get water restrictions, with "midnight" lawn watering and such. One thing this state has done, if I'm not mistaken, all commercial car washing businesses now recycle their water. |
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Oct 19, 9:25 pm, Jack Redington wrote:
wrote: On Oct 18, 7:35 pm, Jack Redington wrote: wrote: On Oct 17, 4:58 pm, Tim wrote: wrote: On Oct 16, 2:29 pm, Tim wrote: wrote: From Lake Lanier Army Corp of Engineers website: Constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the 1950's, Lake Lanier is a multi-purpose lake that provides for flood protection, power production, water supply, navigation, recreation and fish and wildlife management. Same way with Lake Carlyle . that is with exception of power production. It is fed by the Kaskaskia river, and it's level has dropped considerably. it is a huge man made lake and is about 4 mi wide and 10 mi long. But in many places the shore line is rather shallow. in some cases un aprochable with a typical runabout up to 150 ft from shore. But when the lake is full, these spots are usually navagational within 50-75 ft. Still plenty deep in the middle, but unhandy for reaching beach lines. Lake Lanier is fed by two rivers, each runoff from the mountains, so there is a LOT of water being pushed down, normally. Because of downstream concerns plus Atlanta's thirst, they are still, even with drought conditions releasing anywhere from 600 to 900 million gallons per day. Lanier is a really cool lake, because of the mountainous conditions, there are many coves and what used to be creek inlets to explore. How far is your lake down? Lanier is down 12 feet (so far). I don't really know how much it has dropped and really don't know how to find the actual stats, but on the south end the lake is dammed, and there's very little coming over the spill way. kaskaskia isn't a large river, but now it's about like a creek. I saw a bit ont he Weather Channel about Lake Hartwell. It's in bad shape too. fortunately for our area, it's been raining fairly steady for the last three hrs and I did look and saw its steady on Carlyle too. But it won't effect the lake much at all, unless the rains start saturating up north to flow down.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Tim, if it's an Army Corp lake, you can get current stats, predictions, etc from the Corp's website. Yes, Hartwell is in bad shape too. Oconee is the only one in these parts not suffering. I think Hartwell is down about 10-11 ft and things do not look good. Last weekend I had 15 ft under my dock in Gumlog creek. But our place is blessed with deep water. My biggest concern is getting out of Gumlog Creek to the main channel. There is one point that is rather skinny, but I check it last weekend and there is a skinny, but deep path threw it. At this time I am considering if I should get a trailer for the runabout and pull it. If this goes into next year I don't want to be stuck with the boat on the lift and no way to get it out. ie ramp access etc. Capt Jack R.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I've fished up in Gumlog creek. Had a friend who had a place close to there. Lake Lanier is now down 14 feet, they are saying there's enough water for 80 days. Army Corp of Engineers, because of their attitude that no one can make a decision unless it's in some obscure code or law, won't stop; discharging even now! Well if you are ever in the area again let me know. I'll do that, thanks! And I agree, the corp is going to keep doing this even though it really does not make any sense to me. Where I live they pull water from Lanier. I guess when the place is dry they will stop :-( Capt Jack R..- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - As of last night, the state has filed an injunction to try and get this madness stopped. I've dealt with the Corp, and have vowed to never, ever take a project that they are involved in. They get to use zero engineering judgement, and can only do what is spelled out in a manual, or code book. |
Lake Lanier drying up?
"thunder" wrote in message ... On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 06:03:23 -0700, Tim wrote: This DOES look bad! http://news.aol.com/story/_a/officia...9214109990001? ncid=NWS00010000000001 Yes it does. I wish all the locals luck. Maybe a very wet, low wind, hurricane? Here, we have had several, fortunately minor, droughts. Some people just don't seem to get water restrictions, with "midnight" lawn watering and such. One thing this state has done, if I'm not mistaken, all commercial car washing businesses now recycle their water. That's why I avoid them in winter and wash by hand when I'm able. I don't want road salt solution pressure sprayed into every crevice on my vehicles. |
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Oct 20, 9:03 am, Tim wrote:
This DOES look bad! http://news.aol.com/story/_a/officia...s-in-atlanta/2... Here's some pictures: http://www.wsbtv.com/slideshow/news/...40/detail.html |
Lake Lanier drying up?
wrote:
On Oct 20, 9:03 am, Tim wrote: This DOES look bad! http://news.aol.com/story/_a/officia...s-in-atlanta/2... Here's some pictures: http://www.wsbtv.com/slideshow/news/...40/detail.html Thanks. Interesting that Reggie Returdo, our "experienced" alleged boater who allegedly boats on Lake Lanier, hasn't been discussing this drought the last couple of months in rec.boats. |
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 11:55:43 -0300, Don White wrote:
That's why I avoid them in winter and wash by hand when I'm able. I don't want road salt solution pressure sprayed into every crevice on my vehicles. Damn, I never thought of that, but I don't have to worry. I wash my car once every couple of years, whether it needs it or not. Hey, that's what the rain if for. ;-) |
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Oct 20, 9:22 am, wrote:
On Oct 20, 9:03 am, Tim wrote: This DOES look bad! http://news.aol.com/story/_a/officia...s-in-atlanta/2... Ok, I have only been watching what I see on the news but is the corps still blowing water out the dams for no apparant reason (as they have suggested in some reports)? Yes, they are. And as this lake gets smaller, and the story and visuals get bigger, does it serve to help the Global taxing crowd prove their points? Jeez, talking about black helicopters! Do you think that liberals somehow conjured up the drought to be able to prove that global warming exists? Who exactly is this "Global taxing crowd" you speak of? |
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Oct 20, 12:33 pm, wrote:
On Oct 20, 9:22 am, wrote: On Oct 20, 9:03 am, Tim wrote: This DOES look bad! http://news.aol.com/story/_a/officia...s-in-atlanta/2... Ok, I have only been watching what I see on the news but is the corps still blowing water out the dams for no apparant reason (as they have suggested in some reports)? Yes, they are. And as this lake gets smaller, and the story and visuals get bigger, does it serve to help the Global taxing crowd prove their points? Jeez, talking about black helicopters! Do you think that liberals somehow conjured up the drought to be able to prove that global warming exists? Who exactly is this "Global taxing crowd" you speak of? No, and I probably said this wrong. What I really meant is from what I know and have seen, (I have lived down there too) the corps never seem to have any accountability, just do what they see fit, kinda' like the FED. And I did not mean the corps had golbal taxing in mind but I am wondering if the corps actions will give the GT crowd more ammo, and if so if it would be a legit arguement... |
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Oct 20, 1:21 pm, wrote:
On Oct 20, 12:33 pm, wrote: On Oct 20, 9:22 am, wrote: On Oct 20, 9:03 am, Tim wrote: This DOES look bad! http://news.aol.com/story/_a/officia...s-in-atlanta/2... Ok, I have only been watching what I see on the news but is the corps still blowing water out the dams for no apparant reason (as they have suggested in some reports)? Yes, they are. And as this lake gets smaller, and the story and visuals get bigger, does it serve to help the Global taxing crowd prove their points? Jeez, talking about black helicopters! Do you think that liberals somehow conjured up the drought to be able to prove that global warming exists? Who exactly is this "Global taxing crowd" you speak of? No, and I probably said this wrong. What I really meant is from what I know and have seen, (I have lived down there too) the corps never seem to have any accountability, just do what they see fit, kinda' like the FED. And I did not mean the corps had golbal taxing in mind but I am wondering if the corps actions will give the GT crowd more ammo, and if so if it would be a legit arguement...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - The Corp can do nothing except what is in some manual, etc. That is why they are refusing to use any good sense in this issue. There is a court ordered amount of water that they must release, and that is just what they will do, unless we can stop them somehow, until the last drop flows out. I'm wondering, because they are unable to use ANY judgement of their own accord, what they'll do to keep water flowing out of the dam after the lake has dried up! |
Lake Lanier drying up?
wrote in message ps.com... On Oct 20, 1:21 pm, wrote: On Oct 20, 12:33 pm, wrote: On Oct 20, 9:22 am, wrote: On Oct 20, 9:03 am, Tim wrote: This DOES look bad! http://news.aol.com/story/_a/officia...s-in-atlanta/2... Ok, I have only been watching what I see on the news but is the corps still blowing water out the dams for no apparant reason (as they have suggested in some reports)? Yes, they are. And as this lake gets smaller, and the story and visuals get bigger, does it serve to help the Global taxing crowd prove their points? Jeez, talking about black helicopters! Do you think that liberals somehow conjured up the drought to be able to prove that global warming exists? Who exactly is this "Global taxing crowd" you speak of? No, and I probably said this wrong. What I really meant is from what I know and have seen, (I have lived down there too) the corps never seem to have any accountability, just do what they see fit, kinda' like the FED. And I did not mean the corps had golbal taxing in mind but I am wondering if the corps actions will give the GT crowd more ammo, and if so if it would be a legit arguement...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - The Corp can do nothing except what is in some manual, etc. That is why they are refusing to use any good sense in this issue. There is a court ordered amount of water that they must release, and that is just what they will do, unless we can stop them somehow, until the last drop flows out. I'm wondering, because they are unable to use ANY judgement of their own accord, what they'll do to keep water flowing out of the dam after the lake has dried up! They're just following the law, dummy. |
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Oct 21, 10:33 am, wrote:
On Oct 20, 1:21 pm, wrote: On Oct 20, 12:33 pm, wrote: On Oct 20, 9:22 am, wrote: On Oct 20, 9:03 am, Tim wrote: This DOES look bad! http://news.aol.com/story/_a/officia...s-in-atlanta/2... Ok, I have only been watching what I see on the news but is the corps still blowing water out the dams for no apparant reason (as they have suggested in some reports)? Yes, they are. And as this lake gets smaller, and the story and visuals get bigger, does it serve to help the Global taxing crowd prove their points? Jeez, talking about black helicopters! Do you think that liberals somehow conjured up the drought to be able to prove that global warming exists? Who exactly is this "Global taxing crowd" you speak of? No, and I probably said this wrong. What I really meant is from what I know and have seen, (I have lived down there too) the corps never seem to have any accountability, just do what they see fit, kinda' like the FED. And I did not mean the corps had golbal taxing in mind but I am wondering if the corps actions will give the GT crowd more ammo, and if so if it would be a legit arguement...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - The Corp can do nothing except what is in some manual, etc. That is why they are refusing to use any good sense in this issue. There is a court ordered amount of water that they must release, and that is just what they will do, unless we can stop them somehow, until the last drop flows out. I'm wondering, because they are unable to use ANY judgement of their own accord, what they'll do to keep water flowing out of the dam after the lake has dried up!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Ok, the guy (I saw on the news) was probably being somewhat sarcastic but he said it was about saving some muscles and fish down river. Sounds like some green group got a law passed at one point that could really backfire, do I got this right? |
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Oct 21, 8:10 pm, "BillP" wrote:
wrote in message ps.com... On Oct 20, 1:21 pm, wrote: On Oct 20, 12:33 pm, wrote: On Oct 20, 9:22 am, wrote: On Oct 20, 9:03 am, Tim wrote: This DOES look bad! http://news.aol.com/story/_a/officia...s-in-atlanta/2... Ok, I have only been watching what I see on the news but is the corps still blowing water out the dams for no apparant reason (as they have suggested in some reports)? Yes, they are. And as this lake gets smaller, and the story and visuals get bigger, does it serve to help the Global taxing crowd prove their points? Jeez, talking about black helicopters! Do you think that liberals somehow conjured up the drought to be able to prove that global warming exists? Who exactly is this "Global taxing crowd" you speak of? No, and I probably said this wrong. What I really meant is from what I know and have seen, (I have lived down there too) the corps never seem to have any accountability, just do what they see fit, kinda' like the FED. And I did not mean the corps had golbal taxing in mind but I am wondering if the corps actions will give the GT crowd more ammo, and if so if it would be a legit arguement...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - The Corp can do nothing except what is in some manual, etc. That is why they are refusing to use any good sense in this issue. There is a court ordered amount of water that they must release, and that is just what they will do, unless we can stop them somehow, until the last drop flows out. I'm wondering, because they are unable to use ANY judgement of their own accord, what they'll do to keep water flowing out of the dam after the lake has dried up! They're just following the law, dummy.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Damn, Dan, every time you enter into a conversation, you show your stupidity. Where did I say they were doing anything *but* "following the law", dummy? What I DID say was that they aren't allowed to use any judgement of their own accord. I've dealt with the Corp on several projects in the past, and never will again, because of that. |
Lake Lanier drying up?
On Oct 21, 8:19 pm, wrote:
On Oct 21, 10:33 am, wrote: On Oct 20, 1:21 pm, wrote: On Oct 20, 12:33 pm, wrote: On Oct 20, 9:22 am, wrote: On Oct 20, 9:03 am, Tim wrote: This DOES look bad! http://news.aol.com/story/_a/officia...s-in-atlanta/2... Ok, I have only been watching what I see on the news but is the corps still blowing water out the dams for no apparant reason (as they have suggested in some reports)? Yes, they are. And as this lake gets smaller, and the story and visuals get bigger, does it serve to help the Global taxing crowd prove their points? Jeez, talking about black helicopters! Do you think that liberals somehow conjured up the drought to be able to prove that global warming exists? Who exactly is this "Global taxing crowd" you speak of? No, and I probably said this wrong. What I really meant is from what I know and have seen, (I have lived down there too) the corps never seem to have any accountability, just do what they see fit, kinda' like the FED. And I did not mean the corps had golbal taxing in mind but I am wondering if the corps actions will give the GT crowd more ammo, and if so if it would be a legit arguement...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - The Corp can do nothing except what is in some manual, etc. That is why they are refusing to use any good sense in this issue. There is a court ordered amount of water that they must release, and that is just what they will do, unless we can stop them somehow, until the last drop flows out. I'm wondering, because they are unable to use ANY judgement of their own accord, what they'll do to keep water flowing out of the dam after the lake has dried up!- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Ok, the guy (I saw on the news) was probably being somewhat sarcastic but he said it was about saving some muscles and fish down river. Sounds like some green group got a law passed at one point that could really backfire, do I got this right?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - There are several reasons for the corp being forced by law to release a given amount of water. One is some fresh water mussel in FL. And no, it wasn't some "green group". There are downstream generating plants, downstream places that use the water for drinking, etc. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:32 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com