DOCSLIB.ORG

Buford Dam and Lake Sidney Lanier, Georgia (Flood Control, Navigation and Power)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Buford Dam and Lake Sidney Lanier, Georgia (Flood Control, Navigation and Power) FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT BUFORD DAM AND LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GEORGIA (FLOOD CONTROL, NAVIGATION AND POWER) Prepared by U. S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT MOBILE, ALABAMA DECEMBER 1974 SUMMARY BUFORD DAM AND LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GEORGIA (FLOOD CONTROL, NAVIGATION AND POWER) ( ) Draft Environmental Statement (X) Final Environmental Statement Responsible Office: District Engineer, U. S. Army Engineer District, Mobile P. 0. Box 2288 Mobile, Alabama 36628 (205) 690-2511 1. Name of Action: (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action: Continuation of operation and main­ tenance of an existing multipurpose dam and reservoir located on the Chattahoochee River in Gwinnett, Hall, Forsyth, and Dawson Counties, Georgia. The project provides flood control, regulation of stream flow for navigation, hydroelectric power generation and the additional benefits of recreation and water supply. 3 . a. Environmental Impact: The project provides an average annual benefit of $63^,700 in flood control and land enhance­ ment. The hydroelectric facilities have a capacity of 86,000 kw and are operated to meet peak demands for electricity in the service area. Low-flow augmentation provides water for navi­ gation, industrial and municipal uses downstream. The reser­ voir provides a source of water supply for public water utili­ ties. Over 13.8 million visitors utilized the recreational facilities of the lake in 1973. The current benefit-to-cost ratio is 3*6 to 1. b. Adverse Environmental Effects: During late summer and fall water released by power generation has a dissolved oxygen content below state standards due to thermal stratifi­ cation and turbine intakes being located in the hypolimnion. The release of large flows by peaking power generation causes erosion of the river banks and of some archaeological sites downstream. Enrichment of portions of the lake by the dis­ charge of wastes causes localized deterioration of water quality and algal blooms. 4. Alternatives: Discontinue operation and maintenance of the project with a loss of benefits from flood control, power generation, low-flow augmentation, water supply, and recrea­ tion. Various combinations of the project features could be operated with a loss of some of the present benefits and an increase in other benefits. 5. Comments Received: Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration Department of Housing and Urban Development Department of the Interior Environmental Protection Agency Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service Department of Commerce U. S. Coast Guard Georgia State Clearinghouse Georgia Mountains Area Planning and Development Commission Forest Supervisor, U. S. Forest Service District Conservationist, Soil Conservation Service RC&D Project Coordinator, Soil Conservation Service Department of Natural Resources, Historic Preservation Section Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division 6. Draft statement to CEQ 20 November 1973- Final statement to CEQ_____1 R JUL 1975___ • PINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT BUFORD DAM AND LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GEORGIA (FLOOD CONTROL, NAVIGATION AND POWER) Table of Contents Section Page No. Subject No. 1 Project Description------------------------ 1 2 Environmental Setting of the Project------ 6 3 Relationship of Continued Operation and 16 Maintenance of the Project to Land Use Plans-------------------------------------- 4 The Environmental Impact of the Proposed 16 Action ----------------------------------- 5 Any Adverse Environmental Effects Which 19 Cannot be Avoided Should the Proposal Be Implemented ------------------------- 6 Alternatives to the Proposed Action ---- 19 7 The Relationship Between Local Short-term 21 Uses of Man's Environment and the Main­ tenance and Enhancement of Long-term Productivity---------------------------- 8 Any Irreversible and Irretrievable Commit- 22 ments of Resources Which Would Be Involved In the Proposed Action Should It Be Imple­ mented— 9 Coordination With Others ----------------- 22 Appendix A - Letters With Comments Appendix B - References Prepared by MOBILE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS With Data Prepared Under Contract By HERBERT H. ROGERS FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT BUFORD DAM AND LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GEORGIA (FLOOD CONTROL, NAVIGATION AND POWER) 1. Project Description. Buford Dam is located on the Chattahoochee River in Gwinnett and Forsyth Counties, Georgia, about 35 miles northeast of Atlanta and *+.5 miles northeast of Buford, Georgia. The project con­ sists of an earth dam supplemented by three saddle dikes and an unpaved chute spillway, an 86,000 KW power plant, and appurtenances. The main dam, 1,630 feet long and 192 feet high at maximum section, is an earth-fill structure with a rock section on the upstream side. The saddle dikes are earth fill with a rock section on the crest and upstream face and the spillway is an unpaved uncon­ trolled chute with crest at elevation 1,085 msl. The concrete intake structure located in an excavated channel contains gates and operating equipment for regulating the flow through two power penstocks and the flood-control sluice. The sluice, 13.25 feet in diameter, is provided for those occasions when it is necessary to release water in flood-control storage or for low-water flow regulation. The concrete powerhouse, with 3 generating bays and an erection bay, is located in a deep rock cut at the right end of the earth dam just downstream from the intake structure. The transformer yard is connected to the powerhouse by a short power cable tunnel. The switch­ yard located to the west of the powerhouse on a hill overlooking the site is connected to the transformers by overhead lines spanning the tailrace. The 1,0^0 square-mile drainage area above the dam lies on the southern slope of the Blue Ridge Mountains and is charac­ terized by the steep slopes of mountain streams. The location is shown on the map following this page. Buford Dam is a multiple-purpose project with prin­ cipal purposes of flood-control, navigation and power. The lake is in Forsyth, Hall, Gwinnett, Dawson and Lump­ kin Counties. The main dam was completed in late 1955 and the entire project was essentially complete by the end of June, 1957. It reduces flood stages in the Chatta­ hoochee River as far downstream as the West Point Re­ servoir, Georgia, 150 miles below the dam; provides an increased flow for navigation in the Apalachicola River below Jim Woodruff Dam during low-flow seasons; and pro­ duces hydroelectric energy, operating as a peaking power plant. The increased flow in dry seasons also provides for an increased water supply for municipal and industrial uses in the metropolitan area of Atlanta, and permits in­ creased production of hydroelectric energy at down-stream plants. The current benefit-to-cost ratio is 3-6. Lake Sidney Lanier, the lake formed by Buford Dam, has a total storage capacity of 2,55^*000 acre-feet at full flood-control pool, elevation 1,085 msl. At this elevation the lake covers an area of 47,180 acres and ex­ tends 48 miles up the Chattahoochee River and 21.5 miles up the Chestatee River. At full power pool, elevation 1,070 msl, the lake covers 38,020 acres, has a storage capacity of 1 ,917*000 acre-feet and a shoreline of 540 m i l e s 1 at minimum power pool, elevation 1,035 msl, the area covered is 22,440 acres and the capacity is 867,600 acre-feet. Pertinent data for the project follows. PERTINENT DATA STREAM FLOW * Drainage area at dam site - square miles 1 , 0 4 0 Estimated minimum discharge (25 Aug 1925) - cfs 11 9 Minimum mean monthly flow (Sep 1925) - cfs 263 Average annual flow (1903-1958) - cfs 2 0 2 4 Discharge at bankfull stage - cfs 10,000 Maximum mean monthly flow (Dec 1932) - cfs 8 , 5 9 0 Maximum recorded discharge (8 Jan 1946) - cfs 5 5 . 0 0 0 SPILLWAY-DESIGN FLOOD Total rainfall - inches 23.90 Initial loss - inches 0.00 Average infiltration rate - inches per hour 0.08 Total storm run-off - inches 20.14 Total volume of storm run-off - acre-feet 1,117,100 Peak rates of flow Natural flow at dam site - cfs 405,400 Inflow to full reservoir - cfs 595,000 Total reservoir outflow - cfs 30,400 Spillway discharge - cfs 18,200 Duration of flood - days 4 RESERVOIR Pool elevations - feet msl Maximum pool, spillway design flood 1101.3 (initial pool, elevation 1081) Top of flood-control pool 1085 Top of power pool 1070 Minimum power pool 1035 *Before Buford Dam went into full operation. Storage volumes - acre feet Total Storage - elev. 1085 2 , 5 5 4 , 0 0 0 Flood-control storage, elev. 1085 to 1070 637,000 (11.48 inches runoff) Power storage, elev. 1070 to 1035 1 , 0 4 9 , 4 0 0 (18.91 inches runoff) Dead storage, below elev. 1035 867,600 Reservoir areas - acres Top of flood-control pool, elev. 1085 4 7 , 1 8 2 Top of power pool, elev. 1070 3 8 , 0 2 4 At maximum drawdown, elev. 1035 2 2 , 4 4 2 Area within taking line - acres Purchased in fee simple 5 6 , 1 5 5 Right to inundate acquired by easement 7 19 R i v e r Bed 1 , 1 3 3 TOTAL 5 8 , 0 0 7 Length of shore line - miles Top of flood-control pool, elev. 1085 760 Top of power pool, elev. 1070 5 4 0 Length of reservoir at elevation 1070 - river m i l e s Chattahoochee River 4 4 Chestatee River 19 DAM Type Rolled-fill earth Length along crest of main dam - feet 1 . 6 3 0 Top width - feet 4 0 Base width (approx.) - feet 1 , 0 0 0 Height of main dam above river bed - feet 1 92 Total length of saddle dikes - feet 6,600 Elevation, top of dam and saddle dikes - feet m s l 1,106 SPILLWAY T y p e Uncontrolled chute Width of chute - feet 1 0 0 Crest elevation - feet, msl 1 , 0 8 5 FLOOD-CONTROL SLUICE Number of sluices 1 Diameter - feet 1 3 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cobb County, Georgia and Incorporated Areas
    VOLUME 1 OF 4 Cobb County COBB COUNTY, GEORGIA AND INCORPORATED AREAS COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NUMBER ACWORTH, CITY OF 130053 AUSTELL, CITY OF 130054 COBB COUNTY 130052 (UNINCORPORATED AREAS) KENNESAW, CITY OF 130055 MARIETTA, CITY OF 130226 POWDER SPRINGS, CITY OF 130056 SMYRNA, CITY OF 130057 REVISED: MARCH 4, 2013 FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 13067CV001D NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report may not contain all data available within the Community Map Repository. Please contact the Community Map Repository for any additional data. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) may revise and republish part or all of this FIS report at any time. In addition, FEMA may revise part of this FIS report by the Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS report. Therefore, users should consult with community officials and check the Community Map Repository to obtain the most current FIS report components. Initial Countywide FIS Effective Date: August 18, 1992 Revised Countywide FIS Effective Date: December 16, 2008 Revised Countywide FIS Effective Date: March 4, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Purpose of Study 1 1.2 Authority and Acknowledgments 1 1.3 Coordination 3 2.0 AREA STUDIED 5 2.1 Scope of Study 5 2.2 Community Description 10 2.3 Principal Flood Problems
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Apalachicola-Chattahoochee
    Georgia: Upper Apalachicola- Case Study Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin Water Resource Strategies and Information Needs in Response to Extreme Weather/Climate Events ACF Basin The Story in Brief Communities in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin (ACF) in Georgia, including Gwinnett County and the city of Atlanta, faced four consecutive extreme weather events: drought of 2007-08, floods of Sep- tember and winter 2009, and drought of 2011-12. These events cost taxpayers millions of dollars in damaged infrastructure, homes, and businesses and threatened water supply for ecological, agricultural, energy, and urban water users. Water utilities were faced with ensuring reliable service during and after these events. Drought of 2007-2008 and 2012 Impacts Northern Georgia saw record-low precipitation in 2007. By late spring 2008, Lake Lanier, the state’s major water supply, was at 50% of its storage capacity. The drought, combined with record-high temperatures, caused an estimated $1.3 billion in economic losses and threatened local water utilities’ ability to meet demand for four million people. Similar drought conditions unfolded in 2011-2012, during which numerous Water Trends Georgia counties were declared disaster zones. The Chattahoochee River, its tributaries, and Reduced rain affected recharge of the surface-water- Lake Lanier provide water to most of the dependent reservoir. It reduced flows, dried tributaries, “There is nothing simple, nothing one sub-basin Atlanta and Columbus metro populations. The and caused ecological damage in a landscape already river is the most heavily used water resource in affected by urbanization, impervious cover, and reduced can do to solve the problem.
    [Show full text]
  • List of TMDL Implementation Plans with Tmdls Organized by Basin
    Latest 305(b)/303(d) List of Streams List of Stream Reaches With TMDLs and TMDL Implementation Plans - Updated June 2011 Total Maximum Daily Loadings TMDL TMDL PLAN DELIST BASIN NAME HUC10 REACH NAME LOCATION VIOLATIONS TMDL YEAR TMDL PLAN YEAR YEAR Altamaha 0307010601 Bullard Creek ~0.25 mi u/s Altamaha Road to Altamaha River Bio(sediment) TMDL 2007 09/30/2009 Altamaha 0307010601 Cobb Creek Oconee Creek to Altamaha River DO TMDL 2001 TMDL PLAN 08/31/2003 Altamaha 0307010601 Cobb Creek Oconee Creek to Altamaha River FC 2012 Altamaha 0307010601 Milligan Creek Uvalda to Altamaha River DO TMDL 2001 TMDL PLAN 08/31/2003 2006 Altamaha 0307010601 Milligan Creek Uvalda to Altamaha River FC TMDL 2001 TMDL PLAN 08/31/2003 Altamaha 0307010601 Oconee Creek Headwaters to Cobb Creek DO TMDL 2001 TMDL PLAN 08/31/2003 Altamaha 0307010601 Oconee Creek Headwaters to Cobb Creek FC TMDL 2001 TMDL PLAN 08/31/2003 Altamaha 0307010602 Ten Mile Creek Little Ten Mile Creek to Altamaha River Bio F 2012 Altamaha 0307010602 Ten Mile Creek Little Ten Mile Creek to Altamaha River DO TMDL 2001 TMDL PLAN 08/31/2003 Altamaha 0307010603 Beards Creek Spring Branch to Altamaha River Bio F 2012 Altamaha 0307010603 Five Mile Creek Headwaters to Altamaha River Bio(sediment) TMDL 2007 09/30/2009 Altamaha 0307010603 Goose Creek U/S Rd. S1922(Walton Griffis Rd.) to Little Goose Creek FC TMDL 2001 TMDL PLAN 08/31/2003 Altamaha 0307010603 Mushmelon Creek Headwaters to Delbos Bay Bio F 2012 Altamaha 0307010604 Altamaha River Confluence of Oconee and Ocmulgee Rivers to ITT Rayonier
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Stream Runoff Trends in the Blue Ridge and Piedmont of Southeastern United States
    Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Geosciences Theses Department of Geosciences 4-20-2009 Analysis of Stream Runoff Trends in the Blue Ridge and Piedmont of Southeastern United States Usha Kharel Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/geosciences_theses Part of the Geography Commons, and the Geology Commons Recommended Citation Kharel, Usha, "Analysis of Stream Runoff Trends in the Blue Ridge and Piedmont of Southeastern United States." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2009. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/geosciences_theses/15 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Geosciences at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Geosciences Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ANALYSIS OF STREAM RUNOFF TRENDS IN THE BLUE RIDGE AND PIEDMONT OF SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES by USHA KHAREL Under the Direction of Seth Rose ABSTRACT The purpose of the study was to examine the temporal trends of three monthly variables: stream runoff, rainfall and air temperature and to find out if any correlation exists between rainfall and stream runoff in the Blue Ridge and Piedmont provinces of the southeast United States. Trend significance was determined using the non-parametric Mann-Kendall test on a monthly and annual basis. GIS analysis was used to find and integrate the urban and non-urban stream gauging, rainfall and temperature stations in the study area. The Mann-Kendall test showed a statistically insignificant temporal trend for all three variables. The correlation of 0.4 was observed for runoff and rainfall, which showed that these two parameters are moderately correlated.
    [Show full text]
  • Rule 391-3-6-.03. Water Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. Rule 391-3-6-.03. Water Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards ( 1) Purpose. The establishment of water quality standards. (2) W ate r Quality Enhancement: (a) The purposes and intent of the State in establishing Water Quality Standards are to provide enhancement of water quality and prevention of pollution; to protect the public health or welfare in accordance with the public interest for drinking water supplies, conservation of fish, wildlife and other beneficial aquatic life, and agricultural, industrial, recreational, and other reasonable and necessary uses and to maintain and improve the biological integrity of the waters of the State. ( b) The following paragraphs describe the three tiers of the State's waters. (i) Tier 1 - Existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing uses shall be maintained and protected. (ii) Tier 2 - Where the quality of the waters exceed levels necessary to support propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water, that quality shall be maintained and protected unless the division finds, after full satisfaction of the intergovernmental coordination and public participation provisions of the division's continuing planning process, that allowing lower water quality is necessary to accommodate important economic or social development in the area in which the waters are located.
    [Show full text]
  • River Clean-Up Guru, Bobby Marie…
    River Clean-Up Guru, Bobby Marie… 1/11/2012 - Chattahoochee River 1/14/2012 – Etowah River 1/14/2012 – Coosa River 1/14/2012 – Oostanaula River 2/8/2012 – Peachtree Creek, South Fork 2/15/2012 – Peachtree Creek, North Fork 2/29/2012 – Suwannee River 4/21/2012 – Little River 5/16/2012 – Nickajack Creek 6/17/2012 – Altamaha River 8/8/2012 – Amicalola Creek 9/8/2012 – South River To view more 12 in 2012 finishers, go here. 1/11/2012 – Chattahoochee River Good Morning, I and two others paddled upstream on the Chattahoochee from Jones Bridge for about 4 miles then back down on a cold January afternoon on the 11th. It rained on us a couple of times, but the paddling kept us warm. We passed empty golf courses and leafless trees. We did see several herons and a couple of raptors hunting the river. Bobby Marie 1/14/2012 – Etowah, Coosa, Oostanala Rivers On January 14th, I joined Joe Cook and about 100 others on the CRBI Polar Bear Paddle over by Rome, GA. In one day I paddled 3 rivers, the Etowah for the major portion of the trip, then took two side paddles, upstream on the Oostanala for 30 minutes and then down and back up the Coosa for 30 minutes. When you reach the confluence of these three rivers you can look down and see the difference in the waters. The Etowah was greenish and the Oostanala was very brown and the Coosa was a mixture of the two! I only saw one BIG cooter on the bank in the sun the whole day.
    [Show full text]
  • 0429Lanierdoc
    Planned Primary Project Name Corps District Work Description Allocation State ($000) Work performed with recovery funds includes the control and removal of nuisance vegetation from the upper St. Johns River which serves as a nursery area for vegetation which floats downstream into the St. Johns River Federal Navigation Project. This work will keep the project channel open for navigation and to ensure public safety. This vegetation also displaces native species, changes ecosystem structure and alters ecological functions potentially impacting threatened and endangered species. Work will be FL REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, FL JACKSONVILLE performed by hired contract. 225 Award a contract for replacement of critical equipment used to conduct invasive vegetation operations in the Jacksonville District. These operations include survey and monitoring of vegetation in the St. Johns River and Lake Okeechobee. The operations keep the principal navigable waterways and structures open for navigation and to ensure public safety. Additionally, this vegetation displaces native species, changes ecosystem structure and alters ecological functions potentially impacting threatened and endangered FL REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, FL JACKSONVILLE species 225 Snagging, clearing, and removal of fallen trees, stumps and other debris from the Withlachoochee River FL WITHLACOOCHEE RIVER, FL JACKSONVILLE Federal navigation Project for the purpose of ensuring navigation and public safety. 250 Update inundation mapping below project for dam safety, flood damage reduction and emergency action GA ALLATOONA LAKE, GA MOBILE plans in order to improve emergency response to flood events and reduce risk to public. 350 Hire additional contract employees to provide increased maintenance support for project facilities.These activities will provide the public a safe and enjoyable recreational experience at the project.
    [Show full text]
  • Trophic State and Metabolism in a Southeastern Piedmont Reservoir
    TROPHIC STATE AND METABOLISM IN A SOUTHEASTERN PIEDMONT RESERVOIR by Mary Callie Mayhew (Under the direction of Todd C. Rasmussen) Abstract Lake Sidney Lanier is a valuable water resource in the rapidly developing region north of Atlanta, Georgia, USA. The reservoir has been managed by the U.S Army Corps of Engineers for multiple purposes since its completion in 1958. Since approximately 1990, Lake Lanier has been central to series of lawsuits in the “Eastern Water Wars” between Georgia, Alabama and Florida due to its importance as a water-storage facility within the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin. Of specific importance is the need to protect lake water quality to satisfy regional water supply demands, as well as for recreational and environmental purposes. Recently, chlorophyll a levels have exceeded state water-quality standards. These excee- dences have prompted the Georgia Environmental Protection Division to develop Total Max- imum Daily Loads for phosphorus in Lake Lanier. While eutrophication in Southeastern Piedmont impoundments is a regional problem, nutrient cycling in these lakes does not appear to behave in a manner consistent with lakes in higher latitudes, and, hence, may not respond to nutrient-abatement strategies developed elsewhere. Although phosphorus loading to Southeastern Piedmont waterbodies is high, soluble reac- tive phosphorus concentrations are generally low and phosphorus exports from the reservoir are only a small fraction of input loads. The prevailing hypothesis is that ferric oxides in the iron-rich, clay soils of the Southeastern Piedmont effectively sequester phosphorus, which then settle into the lake benthos. Yet, seasonal algal blooms suggest the presence of internal cycling driven by uncertain mechanisms.
    [Show full text]
  • Update of the Water Control Manual
    91154 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 242 / Friday, December 16, 2016 / Notices ADDRESSES section of this notice. Before Jim Woodruff Lock and Dam and Lake total of 705 mgd to a range of 597–621 including your address, phone number, Seminole. mgd—242 mgd from Lake Lanier email address, or any other personal The purpose and need for the federal (instead of 297 mgd) and 355–379 mgd identifying information in your action is to determine how federal downstream (instead of 408 mgd)— comment, you should be aware that projects in the ACF Basin should be through the year 2050 rather than 2040 your entire comment—including your operated for their authorized purposes, as specified in the 2013 request. personal identifying information—may in light of current conditions and USACE’s objectives for the Master be made available to the public at any applicable law, and to implement those Manual are to develop a water control time. While you can request us to operations through updated water plan that meets the existing water withhold your personal identifying control plans and manuals. The resource needs of the basin, fulfills its information from public review, we proposed action will result in an responsibilities in operating for the cannot guarantee that we will be able to updated Master Manual and individual authorized project purposes, and do so. project water control manuals (WCMs) complies with all pertinent laws. The Dated: December 8, 2016. that comply with existing USACE FEIS presents the results of USACE’s regulations and reflect operations under analysis of the environmental effects of Mark Harberg, existing congressional authorizations, the Proposed Action Alternative (PAA) Missouri River Recovery Program Manager, taking into account changes in basin that the USACE believes accomplishes U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Consumption Guidelines: Rivers & Creeks
    FRESHWATER FISH CONSUMPTION GUIDELINES: RIVERS & CREEKS NO RESTRICTIONS ONE MEAL PER WEEK ONE MEAL PER MONTH DO NOT EAT NO DATA Bass, LargemouthBass, Other Bass, Shoal Bass, Spotted Bass, Striped Bass, White Bass, Bluegill Bowfin Buffalo Bullhead Carp Catfish, Blue Catfish, Channel Catfish,Flathead Catfish, White Crappie StripedMullet, Perch, Yellow Chain Pickerel, Redbreast Redhorse Redear Sucker Green Sunfish, Sunfish, Other Brown Trout, Rainbow Trout, Alapaha River Alapahoochee River Allatoona Crk. (Cobb Co.) Altamaha River Altamaha River (below US Route 25) Apalachee River Beaver Crk. (Taylor Co.) Brier Crk. (Burke Co.) Canoochee River (Hwy 192 to Lotts Crk.) Canoochee River (Lotts Crk. to Ogeechee River) Casey Canal Chattahoochee River (Helen to Lk. Lanier) (Buford Dam to Morgan Falls Dam) (Morgan Falls Dam to Peachtree Crk.) * (Peachtree Crk. to Pea Crk.) * (Pea Crk. to West Point Lk., below Franklin) * (West Point dam to I-85) (Oliver Dam to Upatoi Crk.) Chattooga River (NE Georgia, Rabun County) Chestatee River (below Tesnatee Riv.) Chickamauga Crk. (West) Cohulla Crk. (Whitfield Co.) Conasauga River (below Stateline) <18" Coosa River <20" 18 –32" (River Mile Zero to Hwy 100, Floyd Co.) ≥20" >32" <18" Coosa River <20" 18 –32" (Hwy 100 to Stateline, Floyd Co.) ≥20" >32" Coosa River (Coosa, Etowah below <20" Thompson-Weinman dam, Oostanaula) ≥20" Coosawattee River (below Carters) Etowah River (Dawson Co.) Etowah River (above Lake Allatoona) Etowah River (below Lake Allatoona dam) Flint River (Spalding/Fayette Cos.) Flint River (Meriwether/Upson/Pike Cos.) Flint River (Taylor Co.) Flint River (Macon/Dooly/Worth/Lee Cos.) <16" Flint River (Dougherty/Baker Mitchell Cos.) 16–30" >30" Gum Crk.
    [Show full text]
  • NATIONAL FORESTS /// the Southern Appalachians
    NATIONAL FORESTS /// the Southern Appalachians NORTH CAROLINA SOUTH CAROLINA, TENNESSEE » » « « « GEORGIA UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOREST SERVICE National Forests in the Southern Appalachians UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OE AGRICULTURE FOREST SERVICE SOUTHERN REGION ATLANTA, GEORGIA MF-42 R.8 COVER PHOTO.—Lovely Lake Santeetlah in the iXantahala National Forest. In the misty Unicoi Mountains beyond the lake is located the Joyce Kilmer Memorial Forest. F-286647 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OEEICE WASHINGTON : 1940 F 386645 Power from national-forest waters: Streams whose watersheds are protected have a more even flow. I! Where Rivers Are Born Two GREAT ranges of mountains sweep southwestward through Ten­ nessee, the Carolinas, and Georgia. Centering largely in these mountains in the area where the boundaries of the four States converge are five national forests — the Cherokee, Pisgah, Nantahala, Chattahoochee, and Sumter. The more eastern of the ranges on the slopes of which thesefo rests lie is the Blue Ridge which rises abruptly out of the Piedmont country and forms the divide between waters flowing southeast and south into the Atlantic Ocean and northwest to the Tennessee River en route to the Gulf of Mexico. The southeastern slope of the ridge is cut deeply by the rivers which rush toward the plains, the top is rounded, and the northwestern slopes are gentle. Only a few of its peaks rise as much as a mile above the sea. The western range, roughly paralleling the Blue Ridge and connected to it by transverse ranges, is divided into segments by rivers born high on the slopes between the transverse ranges.
    [Show full text]
  • Stream-Temperature Charcteristics in Georgia
    STREAM-TEMPERATURE CHARACTERISTICS IN GEORGIA U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Prepared in cooperation with the GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4203 STREAM-TEMPERATURE CHARACTERISTICS IN GEORGIA By T.R. Dyar and S.J. Alhadeff ______________________________________________________________________________ U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4203 Prepared in cooperation with GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION Atlanta, Georgia 1997 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services 3039 Amwiler Road, Suite 130 Denver Federal Center Peachtree Business Center Box 25286 Atlanta, GA 30360-2824 Denver, CO 80225-0286 CONTENTS Page Abstract . 1 Introduction . 1 Purpose and scope . 2 Previous investigations. 2 Station-identification system . 3 Stream-temperature data . 3 Long-term stream-temperature characteristics. 6 Natural stream-temperature characteristics . 7 Regression analysis . 7 Harmonic mean coefficient . 7 Amplitude coefficient. 10 Phase coefficient . 13 Statewide harmonic equation . 13 Examples of estimating natural stream-temperature characteristics . 15 Panther Creek . 15 West Armuchee Creek . 15 Alcovy River . 18 Altamaha River . 18 Summary of stream-temperature characteristics by river basin . 19 Savannah River basin . 19 Ogeechee River basin. 25 Altamaha River basin. 25 Satilla-St Marys River basins. 26 Suwannee-Ochlockonee River basins . 27 Chattahoochee River basin. 27 Flint River basin. 28 Coosa River basin. 29 Tennessee River basin . 31 Selected references. 31 Tabular data . 33 Graphs showing harmonic stream-temperature curves of observed data and statewide harmonic equation for selected stations, figures 14-211 .
    [Show full text]