DOCSLIB.ORG

Basin 7 Little Tennessee

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Basin 7 Little Tennessee BASIN 7 LITTLE TENNESSEE BASIN DESCRIPTION The Little Tennessee Basin is one of six basins in North Carolina that drain the western slope of the Eastern Continental Divide and flow into the Tennessee River System. The basin is divided into the Little Tennessee River and the Tuckasegee River sub-basins. The Little Tennessee River begins in the mountains of the Chattahoochee National Forest in Rabun County, Georgia and flows north into Macon County, NC. The river is impounded by Fontana Dam about seven miles upstream of the Tennessee state line. The Tuckasegee River drains 737 square miles beginning in 1992 LWSP System Water Use from Basin (mgd) Jackson County. The river flows northwest then west and LWSP Residential Non-resid. Total Sub-basin merges with the Little Tennessee at Fontana Lake. Fontana Population Use Use Use* Lake is a multipurpose TVA facility with hydropower Little Tennessee R. 10,147 0.65 0.70 1.6 production and flood control as important benefits. Fontana Tuckasegee R. 6,975 0.42 0.45 1.0 Dam controls 1571 square miles of the Little Tennessee Basin. Total 17,122 1.1 1.1 2.6 Over 85% of the basin is forested. *Total Use includes unaccounted-for water and sales to other systems. WATER USE On average, residential and non-residential water use Factors Affecting Water Demand were nearly equal, with residential use accounting for 42% This basin is relatively undeveloped. However, there and non-residential use accounting for 45% basinwide. The has been significant population growth in communities in the remaining 13% was unaccounted-for water. region. Development of the casino on the Cherokee Indian LWSP systems expect to supply water to 32,810 Reservation is expected to expand the already successful persons by the year 2020, a 92% increase over 1992 levels. tourism industry in the region. This basin is home to about 1% Their demand for water is projected to grow 110% to 5.4 mgd of the State’s residents and contains all or part of 8 by 2020. municipalities in 6 counties. From 1990 to 1997 year-round In the 1992 LWSPs, 4 of the 7 systems using water population in three counties in this basin grew by 10% or from this basin reported that available supply was not more. adequate to meet estimated demand through 2002. DWR encourages systems to begin planning to Total Water Use in Basin manage and meet future water demands before average daily The U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) 1995 summary water use reaches 80% of a system’s available supply. In the of water use estimated total water use in the basin at 84.5 1992 LWSPs, five systems have plans to add an additional million gallons per day (mgd), almost exclusively from surface water supply totaling 3.6 mgd before demand exceeds 80% of water sources. USGS estimated total basin population at the system’s supply. 73,520. Residential demand was estimated at 3.7 mgd with about 37% (1.4 mgd) of this demand being supplied by public Self-supplied Use water systems. Overall, public water systems supplied 2 mgd The USGS estimated that self-supplied users, of surface water and 0.7 mgd of ground water for both excluding power generating facilities, accounted for 5 mgd of residential and non-residential uses. The remaining residential the mgd total of water used from this basin, as shown in the water demand was met by 2.3 mgd of self-supplied ground table below. Domestic use comprised 47% of the self-supplied water. In addition, there was about 2.7 mgd of self-supplied uses, followed by irrigation (37%), commercial (7%), livestock water withdrawn for non-residential water uses. (6%), and industrial (4%). Local Water Supply Plans (LWSPs) USGS Estimated Self-supplied Water Use in mgd Sub-basin Domestic Livestock Industrial Commercial Irrigation Total All units of local government that supply or plan to Little Tennessee 1.23 0.23 0.19 0.13 1.42 3.2 supply water to the public are required to develop a LWSP. Tuckasegee R. 1.11 0.06 0.00 0.21 0.45 1.8 The Division of Water Resources (DWR) reviews LWSPs and maintains a database of the LWSP information. Basin Total 2.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 1.9 !5.0 LWSPs were submitted by 7 public water systems having service area in this basin or using water from this basin. These systems supplied 2.6 mgd of water from this basin to 17,122 persons. The following table summarizes the LWSP population served with water from this basin and their water use for 1992. Registered Water Withdrawals SUMMARY OF INFORMATION FROM 1992 LWSPs Before 1999, anyone withdrawing 1.0 mgd or more of surface or ground water was required to registered that ! Per capita water use was 150 gallons per day in 1992 and is withdrawal with DWR. In this basin there are 14 registered projected to increase to 175 gallons per day by 2010. withdrawals other than LWSP systems or power generating facilities, with the cumulative capacity to withdraw 28 mgd. ! Six systems are not connected to another water supply Ten of these registered withdrawals are for surface water. In system. 1999, the registration threshold for all water uses except agriculture was lowered to 100,000 gallons per day. March 1, ! The reported raw water supply was 10.7 mgd surface water 2000 is the deadline for registering 1999 withdrawals.. and a 12-hour groundwater supply of 0.2 mgd. WATER AVAILABILITY !Demand-to- supply Ratios for 1992 and 2010: Surface water is the primary source of water for most of the residents of the basin. LWSPs indicate that 5 water 1992 2010 systems in these sub-basins withdraw about 1.9 mgd of surface # of Systems reporting 7 7 water. Local water supply plans show that 2 systems rely on reservoirs for all or part of their water supply. The combined # of Systems reporting ratio > 1.0 0 0 demand on these reservoirs averaged about 0.33 mgd in 1992. # of Systems reporting ratio > 0.9 0 0 The estimated available supply from these reservoirs, based on # of Systems reporting ratio > 0.8 0 0 the 20-year safe yield reported in local water supply plans, is # of Systems reporting ratio > 0.5 0 0 3.2 mgd. Four of the surface water systems submitting local water supply plans have run-of-river intakes. These intakes supplied about 1.6 mgd of water in 1992. The available supply from these sources, based on information reported in local water supply plans, is about 6.2 mgd. The ability to increase withdrawals in the basin depends on site-specific considerations of instream flow needs, water quality protection, and other environmental factors as well as financing and the ability to adjust contracts with owners of privately owned reservoirs. There are 2 systems in this basin using ground water. They have an overall capacity to pump 0.19 mgd of ground water based on the 12-hour yields supplied in their LWSPs. INTERBASIN TRANSFERS OF SURFACE WATER Across the state many water systems move surface water between sub-basins to meet their needs. The Town of Highlands straddles the Little Tennessee and Savannah River basins, resulting in an incidental transfer. Otherwise, there are no interbasin transfers associated with this basin. January 2000 Draft State Water Supply Plan DENR, Division of Water Resources 5-3 Pigeon River HAYWOOD TENNESSEE COUNTY Maggie Valley SD 7-2 JunaluskaClyde SD Tuskasegee River SWAIN Canton COUNTY Waynesville Bryson City Whittier Santeetlah GRAHAM COUNTY Tuckaseigee W&S Authority Robbinsville 5-2 JACKSON French Broad River 7-1 COUNTY Little Tennessee River Brevard Franklin TRANSYLVANIA COUNTY Andrews Marble Community Water System MACON Rosman CHEROKEE COUNTY COUNTY 6-1 Hiwassee River Highlands 8-1 Murphy CLAY Savannah River COUNTY Hayesville GEORGIA LEGEND Miles Basin 7 Little Tennesse 0 2 4 6 8 (unshaded basins) County Boundary Basin Boundary LITTLE TENNESSEE BASIN 1992 and 2010 Population and Water Usage as reported by LWSP systems located in or using water from this basin Water systems showing "Demand as % of Supply" above 80% should be actively planning to control and meet future demand. Water Sources: g - ground water, s - surface water, p - purchased water mgd - million gallons per day 7 LITTLE TENNESSEE Water Total Service Total Water Use in Reported Supply in Demand as % of BASIN Population mgd mgd Supply County Water System Source 1992 2010 1992 2010 1992 2010 1992 2010 GRAHAM ROBBINSVILLE s 2,370 2,868 0.30 0.36 0.9 1.2 33% 30% SANTEETLAH g 300 304 0.02 0.02 0.048 0.068 33% 29% JACKSON TUCKASEIGEE WSA sp 4,400 9,717 0.63 1.15 1.565 3.065 40% 38% MACON FRANKLIN s 6,500 8,500 0.81 1.82 5.1 5.1 16% 36% HIGHLANDS s 977 1,233 0.46 0.75 2.6 3.6 18% 21% SWAIN BRYSON CITY s 2,400 2,576 0.33 0.35 0.56 1.36 59% 26% WHITTIER SD g 175 198 0.01 0.01 0.144 0.144 7% 8% Total 17,122 25,396 2.56 4.46 11 15.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Watershed Organizations in the Southeast Handout Watershed Organizations in the Southeast Handout
    E | Attachment E: in the Organizations Watershed Southeast Handout Southeast Watershed Organizations in the Southeast Handout • Lake Lanier Handout - Alternative Nutrient Strategies Brown and Caldwell Alternative Nutrient Strategies This brochure provides information on watershed based collaboration for protecting and enhancing water quality and quantity. Examples from the southeastern United States are presented to show possibilities for further cooperation in the Lake Lanier watershed. Lake Lanier is a vital resource for its immediate restore compliance. These plans may be called neighbors and beyond, including portions of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). The plans Georgia, Florida, and Alabama. Lake Lanier may be developed with the use of models and provides water supply and multiple recreation may impose limitations on point sources and/or opportunities including boating and fishing. nonpoint sources. Protecting the lake is important to all stakeholders, especially now regarding nutrients. Since before the lake was created in the 1950s, stakeholders have worked to protect the lake Since the passage of the Clean Water Act in 1972, through water conservation, sophisticated the water quality and biological health of thousands wastewater treatment, stormwater management, of waterbodies have been evaluated. State and/or river cleanup events, and other efforts. As growth federal environmental agencies set a water use continues in the watershed, additional efforts will be classification for each waterbody, such as fishing, necessary to
    [Show full text]
  • 0306010606 Augusta Canal-Savannah River HUC 8 Watershed: Middle Savannah
    Georgia Ecological Services U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2/9/2021 HUC 10 Watershed Report HUC 10 Watershed: 0306010606 Augusta Canal-Savannah River HUC 8 Watershed: Middle Savannah Counties: Burke, Columbia, Richmond Major Waterbodies (in GA): McBean Creek, Savannah River, Butler Creek, Boggy Gut Creek, Reed Creek, Newberry Creek, Rocky Creek, Phinizy Swamp, Fort Gordon Reservoir, Bennock Millpond, Lake Olmstead, Millers Pond Federal Listed Species: (historic, known occurrence, or likely to occur in the watershed) E - Endangered, T - Threatened, C - Candidate, CCA - Candidate Conservation species, PE - Proposed Endangered, PT - Proposed Threatened, Pet - Petitioned, R - Rare, U - Uncommon, SC - Species of Concern. Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) US: E; GA: E Occurrence; Please coordinate with National Marine Fisheries Service. Atlantic Sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus) US: E; GA: E Occurrence; Please coordinate with National Marine Fisheries Service. Wood Stork (Mycteria americana) US: T; GA: E Potential Range (county); Survey period: early May Red-cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis) US: E; GA: E Occurrence; Survey period: habitat any time of year or foraging individuals: 1 Apr - 31 May. Frosted Flatwoods Salamander (Ambystoma cingulatum) US: T; GA: T Potential Range (county); Survey period: for larvae 15 Feb - 15 Mar. Canby's Dropwort (Oxypolis canbyi) US: E; GA: E Potential Range (soil type); Survey period: for larvae 15 Feb - 15 Mar. Relict Trillium (Trillium reliquum) US: E; GA: E Occurrence; Survey period: flowering 15 Mar - 30 Apr. Use of a nearby reference site to more accurately determine local flowering period is recommended. Updated: 2/9/2021 0306010606 Augusta Canal-Savannah River 1 Georgia Ecological Services U.S.
    [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]
  • Smallies on the Little T" BASSMASTER MAGAZINE Volume 32, No.7 by Jay Kumar
    "Smallies on the Little T" BASSMASTER MAGAZINE Volume 32, No.7 by Jay Kumar North Carolina's Little Tennessee River Is an untapped hot spot for hard-fighting bronzebacks . SOMEONE SAYS "bass fishing in North Carolina" ---what comes to mind? If you're like me, you can practically taste the sweat running down your face as you probe likely looking weedbeds in lakes and tidal rivers, looking for that monster largemouth. Certainly, smallmouth fishing wouldn't even come up. For the most part, we'd be right. But western North Carolina is mountainous and cool, much like its neighbors, Virginia. West Virginia and Tennessee, all of which are prime small mouth country. Western North Carolina is no different. And tucked away in the Nantahala National Forest is a place where these fish, the "fight- ingest" of all, swim free and largely unmolested: the Little Tennessee River. In fact, almost no one fished for "little T” bronzebacks until a transplanted Arkansas restaurateur decided, after searching all over the South that this was the place he was going to establish an outfit- ting business. It's an "if you build it they will come" story: in 1991, after getting lost on his way out of the Great Smokey Mountains, Jerry Anselmo found himself paralleling the Little T on Route 28. He stopped in town and asked where he could rent a canoe. The answer? Nowhere. So he borrowed one and "just caught the heck out of smallmouths.". That day he started looking for property on the river and the rest is history.
    [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]
  • About Savannah River National Laboratory
    SRNL is a DOE National Laboratory operated by Savannah River Nuclear Solutions. about Savannah River National Laboratory U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY • SAVANNAH RIVER SITE • AIKEN • SC srnl.doe.gov SRNL Fast Facts Intelligence and Nonproliferation Assessments Located at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site at Savannah River National Laboratory near Aiken, South Carolina The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) has extensive experience in supporting the intelligence needs of Operated by the United States and provides a conduit for making SRNL’s Savannah River Nuclear Solutions technical capabilities available to the U.S. intelligence community. SRNL’s internationally recognized expertise “National Laboratory” for DOE stems from the Savannah River Site’s (SRS) rich history of Office of Environmental Management missions supporting the nation’s nuclear weapons stockpile. SRS has a broad base of expertise to include nuclear Applied research, development and reactor operations, plutonium and tritium processing, spent deployment of practical, high-value nuclear fuel reprocessing, environmental monitoring, and and cost effect technology solutions materials science. This experience and knowledge driven in the areas of national security, clean environment allows SRNL to be a valuable resource in U.S. energy and environmental stewardship intelligence and nonproliferation efforts. SRNL Analysis Focus Areas Supporting customers at SRS, DOE and other federal agencies • Foreign Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Program nationally and internationally • Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities - Nuclear reactors, heavy water facilities, reprocessing plants, tritium production Contact Information - Materials security SRNL Office of Communications 803.725.4396 • Remote Sensing • Nonproliferation Policy - Treaties, agreements and regimes - Export control and licensing SRNL supports the arms control and nonproliferation efforts of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Water Quality Information for the Little Tennessee River Basin
    Chapter 3 - Summary of Water Quality Information for the Little Tennessee River Basin 3.1 General Sources of Pollution Human activities can negatively impact surface water quality, even when the Point Sources activity is far removed from the waterbody. With proper management of Piped discharges from: • wastes and land use activities, these Municipal wastewater treatment plants • impacts can be minimized. Pollutants that Industrial facilities • Small package treatment plants enter waters fall into two general • Large urban and industrial stormwater systems categories: point sources and nonpoint sources. Point sources are typically piped discharges and are controlled through regulatory programs administered by the state. All regulated point source discharges in North Carolina must apply for and obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the state. Nonpoint sources include a broad range of land Nonpoint Sources use activities. Nonpoint source pollutants are typically carried to waters by rainfall, runoff or • Construction activities snowmelt. Sediment and nutrients are most often • Roads, parking lots and rooftops associated with nonpoint source pollution. Other • Agriculture pollutants associated with nonpoint source • Failing septic systems and straight pipes pollution include fecal coliform bacteria, oil and • Timber harvesting grease, pesticides and any other substance that • Hydrologic modifications may be washed off of the ground or deposited from the atmosphere into surface waters. Unlike point sources of pollution, nonpoint pollution sources are diffuse in nature and occur intermittently, depending on rainfall events and land disturbance. Given these characteristics, it is difficult and resource intensive to quantify nonpoint contributions to water quality degradation in a given watershed. While nonpoint source pollution control often relies on voluntary actions, the state has many programs designed to reduce nonpoint source pollution.
    [Show full text]
  • Streamflow Maps of Georgia's Major Rivers
    GEORGIA STATE DIVISION OF CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT OF MINES, MINING AND GEOLOGY GARLAND PEYTON, Director THE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Information Circular 21 STREAMFLOW MAPS OF GEORGIA'S MAJOR RIVERS by M. T. Thomson United States Geological Survey Prepared cooperatively by the Geological Survey, United States Department of the Interior, Washington, D. C. ATLANTA 1960 STREAMFLOW MAPS OF GEORGIA'S MAJOR RIVERS by M. T. Thomson Maps are commonly used to show the approximate rates of flow at all localities along the river systems. In addition to average flow, this collection of streamflow maps of Georgia's major rivers shows features such as low flows, flood flows, storage requirements, water power, the effects of storage reservoirs and power operations, and some comparisons of streamflows in different parts of the State. Most of the information shown on the streamflow maps was taken from "The Availability and use of Water in Georgia" by M. T. Thomson, S. M. Herrick, Eugene Brown, and others pub­ lished as Bulletin No. 65 in December 1956 by the Georgia Department of Mines, Mining and Geo­ logy. The average flows reported in that publication and sho\vn on these maps were for the years 1937-1955. That publication should be consulted for detailed information. More recent streamflow information may be obtained from the Atlanta District Office of the Surface Water Branch, Water Resources Division, U. S. Geological Survey, 805 Peachtree Street, N.E., Room 609, Atlanta 8, Georgia. In order to show the streamflows and other features clearly, the river locations are distorted slightly, their lengths are not to scale, and some features are shown by block-like patterns.
    [Show full text]
  • The Savannah River System L STEVENS CR
    The upper reaches of the Bald Eagle river cut through Tallulah Gorge. LAKE TOXAWAY MIDDLE FORK The Seneca and Tugaloo Rivers come together near Hartwell, Georgia CASHIERS SAPPHIRE 0AKLAND TOXAWAY R. to form the Savannah River. From that point, the Savannah flows 300 GRIMSHAWES miles southeasterly to the Atlantic Ocean. The Watershed ROCK BOTTOM A ridge of high ground borders Fly fishermen catch trout on the every river system. This ridge Chattooga and Tallulah Rivers, COLLECTING encloses what is called a EASTATOE CR. SATOLAH tributaries of the Savannah in SYSTEM watershed. Beyond the ridge, LAKE Northeast Georgia. all water flows into another river RABUN BALD SUNSET JOCASSEE JOCASSEE system. Just as water in a bowl flows downward to a common MOUNTAIN CITY destination, all rivers, creeks, KEOWEE RIVER streams, ponds, lakes, wetlands SALEM and other types of water bodies TALLULAH R. CLAYTON PICKENS TAMASSEE in a watershed drain into the MOUNTAIN REST WOLF CR. river system. A watershed creates LAKE BURTON TIGER STEKOA CR. a natural community where CHATTOOGA RIVER ARIAIL every living thing has something WHETSTONE TRANSPORTING WILEY EASLEY SYSTEM in common – the source and SEED LAKEMONT SIX MILE LAKE GOLDEN CR. final disposition of their water. LAKE RABUN LONG CREEK LIBERTY CATEECHEE TALLULAH CHAUGA R. WALHALLA LAKE Tributary Network FALLS KEOWEE NORRIS One of the most surprising characteristics TUGALOO WEST UNION SIXMILE CR. DISPERSING LAKE of a river system is the intricate tributary SYSTEM COURTENAY NEWRY CENTRALEIGHTEENMILE CR. network that makes up the collecting YONAH TWELVEMILE CR. system. This detail does not show the TURNERVILLE LAKE RICHLAND UTICA A River System entire network, only a tiny portion of it.
    [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]
  • Savannah River Basin Management Plan 2001
    Savannah River Basin Management Plan 2001 Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division Georgia River Basin Management Planning Vision, Mission, and Goals What is the VISION for the Georgia RBMP Approach? Clean water to drink, clean water for aquatic life, and clean water for recreation, in adequate amounts to support all these uses in all river basins in the state of Georgia. What is the RBMP MISSION? To develop and implement a river basin planning program to protect, enhance, and restore the waters of the State of Georgia, that will provide for effective monitoring, allocation, use, regulation, and management of water resources. [Established January 1994 by a joint basin advisory committee workgroup.] What are the GOALS to Guide RBMP? 1) To meet or exceed local, state, and federal laws, rules, and regulations. And be consistent with other applicable plans. 2) To identify existing and future water quality issues, emphasizing nonpoint sources of pollution. 3) To propose water quality improvement practices encouraging local involvement to reduce pollution, and monitor and protect water quality. 4) To involve all interested citizens and appropriate organizations in plan development and implementation. 5) To coordinate with other river plans and regional planning. 6) To facilitate local, state, and federal activities to monitor and protect water quality. 7) To identify existing and potential water availability problems and to coordinate development of alternatives. 8) To provide for education of the general public on matters involving the environment and ecological concerns specific to each river basin. 9) To provide for improving aquatic habitat and exploring the feasibility of re-establishing native species of fish.
    [Show full text]
  • Savannah River Basin
    WATERSHED CONDITIONS: SAVANNAH RIVER BASIN Broad Upper Savannah Lynches SANTEE Pee Dee Catawba- Saluda Wateree Little SA Pee Dee V ANN Congaree PEE DEE Waccamaw Black AH Santee Lower Edisto Savannah ACE Ashley- VIRGINI A Cooper Combahee- Coosawhatchie NO RT H C A R OLI NA Pee Dee Santee basin basin SOUTH Savannah CA RO LI NA basin ACE GEORGIA basin South Carolina Water Assessment 8-1 UPPER SAVANNAH RIVER SUBBASIN The region is predominantly rural, and its principal population centers are dispersed along its length. The major towns in 2000 were Anderson (25,514), Greenwood (22,071), Easley (17,754), Clemson (11,939), Seneca (7,652), and Abbeville (5,840). The year 2005 per capita income for the subbasin counties ranged from $20,643 in McCormick County, which ranked 40th in the State, to $28,561 in Oconee County, which ranked ninth. All of the counties in the subbasin had 1999 median household incomes below the State average of $37,082. Abbeville and McCormick Counties had median household incomes more than $4,000 below the State average (South Carolina Budget and Control Board, 2005). During 2000, the counties of the subbasin had combined annual average employment of non- agricultural wage and salary workers of about 216,000. Labor distribution within the subbasin counties included management, professional, and technical services, 26 percent; production, transportation, and materials moving, 25 percent; sales and office, 22 percent; service, UPPER SAVANNAH RIVER SUBBASIN 14 percent; construction, extraction, and maintenance, 13 percent; and farming, fishing, and forestry, 1 percent. The Upper Savannah River subbasin is located in northwestern South Carolina and extends 140 miles In the sector of manufacturing and public utilities, the southeast from the North Carolina state line to the 1997 annual product value for the subbasin’s counties was Edgefield-Aiken county line.
    [Show full text]