WASHINGTON (AP) -- Three Southeastern governors who are in Washington to lobby for water rights amid a potentially catastrophic drought are likely to put the Bush administration on the spot.
If the administration decides to bolster Georgia's drinking supply,
Alabama and Florida may claim it's crippling their economies to satisfy uncontrolled growth around Atlanta. If it continues releasing water downstream to Alabama and Florida, Georgia could argue that one of the nation's largest cities is being hung out to dry...
At issue is how much water the Army Corps of Engineers should capture in federal reservoirs near the head of two river basins in north
Georgia that flow south into Florida and Alabama.
=====
So, exercise some Solomon-like wisdom. To whom does the water belong? Who has priority and why?
How do we decide matters such as this equitably? How does an unfettered market resolve it? How does a Republic with elected representatives handle it?
What do the small gov't types think of this?
I would imagine, if there were no regulations (ie, totally free market)
in place, then Georgia would consume as much as it wanted and Florida and Alabama would just be out of luck. And it wouldn't matter if Georgia were using the water irresponsibly (growing grass in the middle of the desert, as they do in Arizona, I hear).
But then, the water doesn't belong to Georgia, not to the person from
whose land it originates. Unlike land, water is something that we have not privatized. Is that good or not?
Interesting but difficult questions, I think.
=====
UPDATE:
WASHINGTON — The Army Corps of Engineers would hold back more water in Georgia lakes as the governors of drought-stricken Georgia, Florida and Alabama work toward a water-sharing agreement, under a plan brokered by the Bush administration.
The proposal — which would bolster Atlanta's drinking supply at the expense of users downstream — was announced Thursday after the governors of the three states met with Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne and other administration officials.
12 comments:
Solomon-type wisdom? Cut it in thirds.
That wrote it's self.
"Unlike land, water is something that we have not privatized." Maybe, maybe not. Evian spelled backwards is 'naive'..
Living in SE Alabama this is something that affects me personally. Farley Nuclear plant is less than 10 miles from here, and requires a certain level of water pressure from up river. Without the bare minimum, the plant will be forced to shut down. Farley is a big part of our local grid. Without it... the poor go without electricity when rates go up and they can no longer afford those rates. Fall has just arrived. Winter will follow.
So, I'm curious, Eric, do you support some kind of gov't intervention in this? Do the state gov'ts need to work it out themselves?
What if Georgia decides to "work it out" by keeping as much as they darn well please?
Water is being privatized both here and around the world--and wars are being fought over it. Global warming will increase this because a warmer world is a drier world.
Privatization of whole bodies of water is a frightening concept to me. Anyone can then dam the water upstream and cut off everyone below the dam, which "they've" done throughout history. And that is essentially what Gov. Perdue is asking the Corp of Engineers to do... keep Alabama and Florida from getting what they need for industry and economy... to say nothing of the needs of the individual.
Arbitration seems the best solution here, and that's pretty much what took place in Washington yesterday. At some point communities-- even and ESPECIALLY small communities --will have to consider building their own reservoirs... that would be the prudent thing to do.
I'd even suggest personal reservoirs. I've seen-- in Key West of all places --huge above-ground cisterns. The one I'm thinking of was about ten feet high, squat, and made of baked clay. It had a hole on the top to collect rain water and a lid to keep mosquitoes out. This thing would hold the same amount of water as the average home swimming pool, only this was used for watering, and emergencies. Naturally, the water needed boiling but these people didn't have to worry about water.
EarthShips incorporate a built in cistern that collects rain runoff. This would be a great idea... just as we're trying to move everyone away from fossil fuels, we should try to move everyone toward self-contained living envirnments... or Earthships I'd love to live in an EarthShip.
--Bet you never thought I'd say something like that, huh?
Even when the drought abates, and the rains finally come, as cities grow and expand, the need for water will grow exponentially. The time to think about new reservoirs was last year. Today is too late.
I've thought about this problem for a long time, but the location for my thinking has been different. Here or there Israel/Palestine the problem is quite similar, will the people with the most power in the situation recognize that all people need water to live and our social planning should recognize the dignity and human rights of all the people involved.
Your comment about the privatization of water sources almost pushes me to a tirade about how land should follow water not water flow after land. Yes, land is privately held, but it should not be. Land is a national, global resource. Plus it should be redistributed for the common good. I could rant on but I will stop.
To answer your question to 'small government types', yes, this is an area where privatization doesn't really work. Government oversight is necessary, especially with resources that move (i.e. rivers) between states. The Interstate Commerce Clause in the Constitution covers that, and illustrates how its absence in the Articles of Confederation was a failure.
The amount of ignorance out there about global warming is astounding.
A warmer world is a wetter world. Just look it up in your history books, they're full of examples of the earth being much warmer than it is now and full of life AND water.
But hey, don't let some inconvenient truths get in the way of your political philosophy.
Thanks for visiting, Rightyo, come by anytime. However, the topic here is not global warming, but our very fragile water supply and moral and legal questions surrounding it.
Yes, one commenter linked it to global warming with no evidence. And now you have commented that "warmer=wetter" with no evidence. So, since I'm not wanting to chase down that dog, let's let that thread end here.
I don't believe I've ever had a post on global warming, but if I ever do, feel free to bring some evidence or thoughts one way or the other to the conversation.
And thanks, brd and John, for your thoughts. I agree, John, that issues like this are perfect examples of why we need some larger body like gov't through which we can come to some solutions.
Sorry for trying to hijack your thread.
The problem you run into with letting government in on the solution is that the vast majority of the time they don't work for a solution that's best for the people. They work for a solution that's best for their top donors.
So your recommendation to GA, FLA and others with conflicting water needs...?
And, by the way, I don't particularly have a trust for gov't solutions, either, but that doesn't keep me for looking for smart ways that we, the people, can create policies that work for our advantage.
Post a Comment