# Animal Cruelty!



## Road Guy (Oct 19, 2007)

Can your mutt do this?


----------



## DVINNY (Oct 19, 2007)

That's BadA$$.

I love that dog.


----------



## Road Guy (Oct 19, 2007)

I must admit, that is MY dog


----------



## Guest (Oct 19, 2007)

^^^ Awesome !!!

You couldn't get my pooch near the lake much less into the boat! :true:

JR


----------



## TXengrChickPE (Oct 19, 2007)

mine would be swimming along beside the boat... in the boat? never


----------



## Dleg (Oct 19, 2007)

That is pretty awesome. If my dog could operate a camera, I'd have been on the David Letterman Show by now. Or I;d have my own amateur porn website.

Who's the dog in the boat?

:huh:


----------



## GTScott (Oct 22, 2007)

That has to be photoshopped, there is no water in the lake.

Awesome dog!


----------



## Road Guy (Oct 23, 2007)

maybe its just that the south part of the lake is still okay, but I think the news people are doing a great job of dom &amp; gloom regarding the lake.

I was running +100 feet depth on the depth finder the last few times I have been out.

Off course I think its dumb as hell that the army corps of engineers (not known for being smart though) release more water that they would receive if the lake was never built.

between the COE &amp; the EPD I cant tell who is more retarded...


----------



## MA_PE (Oct 23, 2007)

great shot RG. I'm surprised he's in there, I didn't think borders like to get wet.


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2007)

Road Guy said:


> between the COE &amp; the EPD I cant tell who is more retarded...


Hey! I resemble that remark






If you aren't careful, I am going to lobby for even MORE lake drawdown to protect your downgradient neighbors. Namely me!





JR


----------



## roadwreck (Oct 23, 2007)

Road Guy said:


> maybe its just that the south part of the lake is still okay, but I think the news people are doing a great job of dom &amp; gloom regarding the lake.
> I was running +100 feet depth on the depth finder the last few times I have been out.
> 
> Off course I think its dumb as hell that the army corps of engineers (not known for being smart though) release more water that they would receive if the lake was never built.
> ...


I think this is why people are kinda freaking out.






check out those forecast values. Yum!

The 80 days of water left (or whatever number they keep throwing out there) isn't the number of days till the lake is empty, it's the number of days until the lake level gets to the 'bottom of conservation'. Which I believe happens to coincide with the lowest elevation water can currently be pumped out of the lake unless some changes are made. I'm not sure what the lake elevation would be at the bottom of conservation, but my guess is there would be a lot of unhappy people if the lake ever got that low.

What I don't understand is it would seem as though the COE would want to take some measures against draining the lakes to quickly since if the levels were to get to the point that they were at the 'bottom of conservation' that would mean they would no longer be able to send water downstream and all that bitching about Alabama and Florida not having enough water would kind of be a moot point since then they would have no water too.

The amount of water they are releasing does seem to be a bit excessive though. I haven't lived here that long, but I know I've seen the Chattahoochee with a lot less water in it then now and I don't recall it causing all this hubbub.


----------



## Road Guy (Oct 23, 2007)

MA- I dont know about the rest but our border collie cant get enough of the water.

I can understand we should maintain a certain level in the Chattahoochie, but it makes absolute no sense for us to send down MORE water than we receive, I think if they would make that the minimum standard I think most of us Atlanta people would see that as sensible.

right now were sending out somthing like twice the amount of water we receive, so based on that we should just tear the damn out and let the damn mussles and sturgeon DIE!


----------



## roadwreck (Oct 23, 2007)

Road Guy said:


> I can understand we should maintain a certain level in the Chattahoochie, but it makes absolute no sense for us to send down MORE water than we receive, I think if they would make that the minimum standard I think most of us Atlanta people would see that as sensible.
> right now were sending out somthing like twice the amount of water we receive, so based on that we should just tear the damn out and let the damn mussles and sturgeon DIE!


I agree, somewhat. It would seem that without the reservoir that the Chattahoochee would be running at a much lower level right now b/c of the drought, so everything downstream would be shit up a creek. That said, I'm sure the reservoir was put in place to prevent that from happening. What I don't understand is that the COE seems to be letting water out at a rate so high that it would seem as though there were no drought in the area at all. There needs to be some regulations that state there needs to be a balance between the inflow to the lake and the outflow so that we at this end don't end up high and dry. What kind of water conservation measures are being taken downstream? Here we are under pretty sever watering bans and being asked to cut back anyway we can. I personally know that it's drastically effecting certain businesses in the area.


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2007)

roadwreck said:


> There needs to be some regulations that state there needs to be a balance between the inflow to the lake and the outflow so that we at this end don't end up high and dry. What kind of water conservation measures are being taken downstream?


The problem with regulating the flow is that you are dealing with an interstate issue that crosses several industries (recreation, shellfish, forestry, etc.) and the water consumption (or lack thereof) does become problematic for businesses and individuals when you are told that not only can you NOT have as much water as you want but you will also have to ration what you are given.

I don't have any quickie types of answers. I can say that today there were some folks down in my part of the woods that were telling me that the salinity in parts of the Ocholocknee river has risen so high that fisherman are putting crab traps in the river (pretty far upstream) and they are catching saltwater fish in the river.

I have looked at several optimization models that evaluate various interests and try to specify the problem in terms of resource 'use'. I don't think there is an equitable split in that manner because some utilizing units (like shellfish) have a greater unit need than others (say people recreating). Again, I don't have answers but as long as everyone continues to quibble over the nature of the problem rather than looking towards an equitable solution, there will continue to be problems :2cents:

FWIW - I really DON'T have much of a stake in this other than to say I would like a sound, scientific solution to be presented and get everyone on board.

JR


----------



## roadwreck (Oct 23, 2007)

jregieng said:


> I have looked at several optimization models that evaluate various interests and try to specify the problem in terms of resource 'use'. I don't think there is an equitable split in that manner because some utilizing units (like shellfish) have a greater unit need than others (say people recreating).


At this end it's going beyond just the recreational aspect, I know people who are losing jobs b/c of it. The landscaping business (yes it goes beyond people just cutting your grass) has been hit pretty hard b/c no body is allowed to water anything anymore. That may seem trivial, but when your livelihood depends on it means a bit more then just letting a few plants here and there wither and die.

I think what people are so incensed by here is that the COE is actually increasing the amount of water that is being released from the lake. Presumably this is to try and combat lower river levels downstream (b/c the whole region is in a drought so there is little to no contribution downstream). So as a resident here, you are put under strict water conservation guidelines, people are losing jobs, and you see the river running damn near full. That's gonna piss a few people off.


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2007)

^^^ That is very true and, in fact, I would most likely take issue with my resources being drawn away (to my detriment) so that others may prosper.

Resource allocation is a real bitch - that is my point about establishing a sound, scientific principle that everyone can agree upon. Some of my statements are tongue-in-cheek but I am quite serious about the optimization models as a means to OBJECTIVELY evaluate the resource allocation - in this case water retention or discharge.

Similar issues exist in the Everglades when there is an extreme storm event. When the flooding event comes do you:

a. Allow the middle class neighborhoods to become flooded;

b. Allow the native american's sacred land to become flooded;

c. Allow the flood water to mobilize and further contaminate the river of grass through phosphorous redistribution; or

d. Allow the flood water to inundate the rookeries of the endangered woodstork whose habitat requires him to wade in a very narrowly defined depth of water.

Again, I don't offer solutions - just encouragement for ALL stakeholders (critters included) to be able to weigh in on a decision-making platform. In the end, someone is going to take it in the end - we just need to decide what is more important.

JR


----------



## frazil (Oct 23, 2007)

roadwreck said:


> At this end it's going beyond just the recreational aspect, I know people who are losing jobs b/c of it. The landscaping business (yes it goes beyond people just cutting your grass) has been hit pretty hard b/c no body is allowed to water anything anymore. That may seem trivial, but when your livelihood depends on it means a bit more then just letting a few plants here and there wither and die.


If it's a choice between landscaping and providing water for people to live, it's not a tough decision. The COE is probably under contract to provide a certain about of water to cities and states downstream for water supply and hydropower. There are many instances where the COE has been sued for trying to restrict releases in times of drought. It's easy to blame the regulating agency, but the real issue is the drought and the fact that everyone feels entitled to the water.


----------



## Road Guy (Oct 23, 2007)

My grandfather told me how the environmentalist fought the construction of lake lanier back in the day, imagine if the thing had never been built?


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2007)

frazil said:


> It's easy to blame the regulating agency, but the real issue is the drought and the fact that everyone feels entitled to the water.


Very true.

I was recently reading a book by a noted epidemiologist who was quoted as saying the next major war on a global scale will not be fought over oil. It will be fought over water (potable).

You don't have to have oil to live ...

JR


----------



## Wolverine (Oct 23, 2007)

The other day, some land drawings came across my desk that showed an outline for "Lake Etowah" (for lack of a better name) up in the Rome area. The urban encroachment in the last 50 years makes that dream about a hundred times less likely than the original Lake Lanier given the amount of land that would have to be condemned now. Still, somebody awhile back thunk it and it seems like it would've been a good idea today.

I also once saw aereal photos of Lanier before it was Lanier. I don't see what the big deal was... a couple of barns and a country store. Still down there I suppose.


----------



## Road Guy (Oct 23, 2007)

There is also an old truss bridge down about 110 feet, they couldnt get it removed before it started filling up.

my grandfather took a bunch of pictures as the lake was filling up, they are all slides, but pretty neat to look at, if I had more free time I would get them scanned and print some of them.


----------



## roadwreck (Oct 24, 2007)

Road Guy said:


> There is also an old truss bridge down about 110 feet, they couldnt get it removed before it started filling up.
> my grandfather took a bunch of pictures as the lake was filling up, they are all slides, but pretty neat to look at, if I had more free time I would get them scanned and print some of them.


Maybe we will get to see this bridge again shortly.


----------



## Road Guy (Oct 24, 2007)

HA!

I didnt think about that......


----------



## Guest (Nov 1, 2007)

The Army Corps of Engineers is going to recommend a 16% reduction of flow to the Apalachicola River. That will fix your problem! :screwloose:

:Locolaugh: :Locolaugh:

Corps to request less water for Apalachicola

JR


----------



## Road Guy (Nov 3, 2007)

The COE aint what they used to be, they just need to have the minimum formula for discharge:

Volume of water in = Volume of water out

currently its:

3*(Volume of water in) = Volume of water out

Even an idiot politician &amp; environmentalist should agree on that!

up here we are starting a black market campaign to get everyone in atlanta to go by once a week and take 50 gallons out of the river below the dam.


----------



## Guest (Nov 16, 2007)

^^^ It looks like the COE request was approved today. You get your 16% diversion. I hope you are happy now!!!

Apalchicola flow being reduced now

(all said tongue in cheek) 

JR


----------



## Wolverine (Nov 16, 2007)

Oh yeah, now that the topic got bumped, that reminds me...

I was down by the Hooch a week ago at the GA 400 crossing and it was up to the banks, full flow. Then again two nights later, same thing. Seems the Corps wanted to boost some of the reserves downstream and so they let loose.

And I don't now if I mentioned elsewhere but I was up in N.Ga. at the Georgia Power controlled lakes earlier in the month and they were full. Well, two inches low. Damn Corps. When I invent the static generator and make a billion dollars, I'm going to buy a place up there.


----------



## Slugger926 (Nov 17, 2007)

I would have mine pulling the boat. J/K

I would have the kids in the tube 400 yards out in the lake throwing marks for my dog.

Or I would send her across the lake for a blind retrieve. (me giving her hand signals on where to go)

She has hunt test (duck hunting) titles in HRC and AKC. :multiplespotting: :multiplespotting:


----------



## Road Guy (Nov 18, 2007)

after watching this shit these past few weeks, I really want to see the lake bone dry, then watch the people down stream demand we pump water from the atlantic, de-salinate it, and then contine to send it down stream for their precious fishing industry and mussles.


----------



## roadwreck (Nov 20, 2007)

We have hit a new low. Lake Lanier has set a new record low and it down to only 42% of it's stored water capacity. 

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/sto...age_tab_newstab


----------



## roadwreck (Aug 15, 2009)

http://www.ajc.com/news/allatoona-may-be-n...=rss_news_81960

Now we aren't going to be allowed to get water from Allatoona either. Apparently Florida and Alabama have exclusive rights to all water that falls in GA.


----------



## Road Guy (Aug 17, 2009)

its a good thing if you live in Cobb County they planned ahead and built their own reservoir (with Bartow &amp; Cherokee involvement) of course it wont be full for another few years, but you cant rely on the state / Federal Government for much these days...


----------



## roadwreck (Aug 17, 2009)

Road Guy said:


> its a good thing if you live in Cobb County they planned ahead and built their own reservoir (with Bartow &amp; Cherokee involvement) of course it wont be full for another few years, but you cant rely on the state / Federal Government for much these days...


I thought Alabama had an issue with that reservoir too. Since it prevents water from getting to Allatoona, and thus prevents it from eventually getting to Alabama. I'm not sure what water Georgia is entitled to use anymore. We aren't allowed to drink I guess. Or maybe we should import our water back up from Alabama and Florida. We should institute a policy where all tourists are required to bring a bottle of water with them when they enter the state.


----------



## roadwreck (Aug 17, 2009)

> The lawsuit further takes aim at the Hickory Log Creek Reservoir built and run by Cobb’s water authority and the city of Canton. The reservoir is fed by the creek and the Etowah with water that otherwise would flow into Lake Allatoona and on to Alabama.


See, north Georgia isn't allowed access to any water. Even if we build our own reservoirs. I'm not sure where we are supposed to get water since we don't seem to be entitled to anything that falls within our borders, that water belongs to Alabama and Florida it seems.


----------



## Chucktown PE (Aug 17, 2009)

This is the biggest bunch of bullshit.

As a former Atlantan I'm obviously partial to Georgia's position. So why don't they just tear down the dams and let the Chattahoochee and Etowa rivers flow like they did before the dams were there. Following the "logic" of these lawsuits, then Georgia can take every drop of the water before it gets to the state line. I wonder how Florida and Alabama like that.


----------



## roadwreck (Aug 17, 2009)

Chucktown PE said:


> Following the *"logic"* of these *lawsuits*...


I don't think logic and lawsuit can be in the same sentence together.


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Aug 17, 2009)

roadwreck said:


> I don't think logic and lawsuit can be in the same sentence together.


If the glove does not fit, you must acquit. How does that logic not make sense?


----------



## Capt Worley PE (Aug 17, 2009)




----------



## Guest (Aug 17, 2009)

Chucktown PE said:


> This is the biggest bunch of bullshit.
> As a former Atlantan I'm obviously partial to Georgia's position. So why don't they just tear down the dams and let the Chattahoochee and Etowa rivers flow like they did before the dams were there. Following the "logic" of these lawsuits, then Georgia can take every drop of the water before it gets to the state line. I wonder how Florida and Alabama like that.


I would be a little more sympathetic if there were programs for water reclamation in place. Given that isn't the case, I think everyone deserves a hand slap.

Just sayin' ....

JR


----------



## Road Guy (Aug 17, 2009)

I think we need to look further into the Juges ruling that "drinking water wasnt orignally mentioned as a permitted use of Lake Lanier"

I wonder if it says Parks can operate in the lake? Did they get approval to charge parking fees?

Who says you are allowed to fish on the lake? Why shouldnt the people in Alabama be allowed to catch their fish from the Chattahochie River? Who says you can even swim in the lake? God forbid boating, skiing, etc, etc?

I didnt read the entire decision, but I would think the local governments that take water out just need to build a new pump out station either upstream or downstream.


----------



## Chucktown PE (Aug 17, 2009)

jregieng said:


> I would be a little more sympathetic if there were programs for water reclamation in place. Given that isn't the case, I think everyone deserves a hand slap.
> Just sayin' ....
> 
> JR



There are programs for water reclamation in place. Gwinnett County treats their wastewater to a very high standard (tertiatry filtration followed by MBR for microconstituent removal) and discharges back in to the lake. And they're on outdoor watering bans, so the vast majority of water that gets pulled from the lake for drinking water is put back in.

The same thing for Allatoona. They don't mention that Cobb County Water System returnins water to the basin.


----------



## Chucktown PE (Aug 17, 2009)

Road Guy said:


> I didnt read the entire decision, but I would think the local governments that take water out just need to build a new pump out station either upstream or downstream.


That's what DeKalb County does. They pull just downstream of the dam. I wonder if they'll still be allowed to pull water out of the river or if you're only allowed to do that across the state line. I guess it's only people in Alabama and Florida that are allowed to use Georgia's water?

I sure hope those Gulf Sturgeon and mussles are happy. No telling how many millions of dollars we spent on them. Maybe Georgia should just go scoop them up and put them in the aquarium in ATL. Problem solved.


----------



## roadwreck (Aug 17, 2009)

Chucktown PE said:


> That's what DeKalb County does. They pull just downstream of the dam. I wonder if they'll still be allowed to pull water out of the river or if you're only allowed to do that across the state line. I guess it's only people in Alabama and Florida that are allowed to use Georgia's water?


If the lawsuit is also going after other reservoirs built in the basin then I'd imagine that pulling water out upstream or downstream of the lake would be a no no too.



Chucktown PE said:


> I sure hope those Gulf Sturgeon and mussles are happy. No telling how many millions of dollars we spent on them. Maybe Georgia should just go scoop them up and put them in the aquarium in ATL. Problem solved.


I don't remember seeing anything about gulf sturgeon or mussles in the authorized purpose of the lake either. The Lake’s authorized purpose was to provide flood control, hydropower and navigation. So I guess the sturgeon and mussels are shit out of luck too.


----------



## Chucktown PE (Aug 17, 2009)

roadwreck said:


> I don't remember seeing anything about gulf sturgeon or mussles in the authorized purpose of the lake either. The Lake's authorized purpose was to provide flood control, hydropower and navigation. So I guess the sturgeon and mussels are shit out of luck too.



Nope, they're in Florida, no person, place or thing in Florida will be SOL. Animals in Florida are higher priority than drinking water for 6 million people.


----------



## Guest (Aug 17, 2009)

Chucktown PE said:


> There are programs for water reclamation in place. Gwinnett County treats their wastewater to a very high standard (tertiatry filtration followed by MBR for microconstituent removal) and discharges back in to the lake. And they're on outdoor watering bans, so the vast majority of water that gets pulled from the lake for drinking water is put back in.
> The same thing for Allatoona. They don't mention that Cobb County Water System returnins water to the basin.


Okay - water programs in place and promoting water reclamation are two different things. When I was involved in my small piece of this pie, one of the major arguing factors was that there was so little water reclamation that CONSERVATION needed to be evaluated as one of the pieces of the puzzle.

It's been awhile since I have been involved - I suspect water reclamation is better ... but probably low on the radar.



Chucktown PE said:


> I sure hope those Gulf Sturgeon and mussles are happy. No telling how many millions of dollars we spent on them. Maybe Georgia should just go scoop them up and put them in the aquarium in ATL. Problem solved.


I have been wanting to check out the ATL aquarium!! I heard that it totally rawked! 



roadwreck said:


> I don't remember seeing anything about gulf sturgeon or mussles in the authorized purpose of the lake either. The Lake’s authorized purpose was to provide flood control, hydropower and navigation. So I guess the sturgeon and mussels are shit out of luck too.


Class III surface water body is chracterized as: Recreation, Propagation and Maintenance of a Healthy, Well-Balanced Population of Fish and Wildlife is typically the most protective classification of water. Class II surface water bodies (Shellfish Propagation or Harvesting) is typically subsumed under Class III.



Chucktown PE said:


> Nope, they're in Florida, no person, place or thing in Florida will be SOL. Animals in Florida are higher priority than drinking water for 6 million people.


I read something amazing recently .. a bottom wetland that was deeded to my company from the DEQ for longterm stewardship as the company saw fit. In the letter, the DEQ acknowledged that the bottom wetland had been severely degraded and "_no longer served the public interest_." I find it interesting that at one time, government realized that there were environmental areas, especially sensitive areas that wouldn't be brought back to 'quality' regardless of how they were managed.

Perhaps, Atlanta falls in the same boat - so poorly degraded that it no longer serves the public interest. 

JR


----------



## Guest (Aug 18, 2009)

Chucktown PE said:


> I sure hope those Gulf Sturgeon and mussles are happy. No telling how many millions of dollars we spent on them. Maybe Georgia should just go scoop them up and put them in the aquarium in ATL. Problem solved.


Apparently the chief veterinarian at the aquarium is not only a vet ... but also an engineer with emphasis in wetlands ecology.

ATL Aquariaum Vet - Engineer Profile

Sounds like she would have the right solution for ya! 

JR


----------



## roadwreck (Aug 18, 2009)

jregieng said:


> Perhaps, Atlanta falls in the same boat - so poorly degraded that it no longer serves the public interest.
> JR


says the man that just moved to Michigan.


----------



## Road Guy (Aug 18, 2009)

The Ga Aquarium blows IMO the Tennessee aquarium is better..


----------



## Capt Worley PE (Aug 18, 2009)

roadwreck said:


> says the man that just moved to Michigan.


ZING!


----------



## jeb6294 (Aug 18, 2009)

Road Guy said:


> The Ga Aquarium blows IMO the Tennessee aquarium is better..


Which TN aquarium? We went to the one in Gatlinburg last time we were there and it was alright, they did have a really neat Titanic exhibit at the time, but isn't the "nice" one in Chatanooga?

We've got a pretty nice aquarium in Cincinnati (actually across the river in Newport) except there it is right next to a seafood restaurant...makes me a little nervous.


----------



## Road Guy (Aug 18, 2009)

i meant the one in Chattanooga..


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Aug 18, 2009)

jeb6294 said:


> We've got a pretty nice aquarium in Cincinnati (actually across the river in Newport) except there it is right next to a seafood restaurant...makes me a little nervous.


Mitchell's Fish Market is good. We have one in Louisville too. I always laughed at that one right across from the Newport Aquarium though...it's like you're eating their mistakes...or the combination vet office/taxidermist...either way, you get your pet back.


----------

