Big Dam Backlash Rising in the Sun Belt - Southern Water, Southern Power - page 92

Carolina, like Georgia, the water problem was “not so much one of supply as of distribu-
tion and regulation.” In a refrain often repeated at the time and again in the future, Work-
man claimed that “the quantity of water which falls annually as rain” was enough to supply
South Carolina's “industrial, agricultural, commercial and residential potential.” However,
increased demands for irrigation, energy production, and manufacturing; from dish- and
clothes-washing machines; and for “modern plumbing facilities” all boosted water and en-
ergy consumption “terrifically.” 46 The Sun Belt South's water problems had clearly reached
a tipping point in the 1950s, but there was disagreement over the solutions and the utility
of major reservoirs and small farm ponds.
Georgians directly confronted their water insecurity in the midst of the 1950s drought
when the annual rainfall was twenty inches less than average. In late 1953, attendees of Ge-
orgia's Association of Soil Conservation District Supervisors meeting discussed the state's
“water problems” and water law. Participants hatched an idea, and within months they as-
sembled the Georgia Water Use and Conservation Committee to promote water “conserva-
tion” and “wise use” to protect the state's future water supply. For clarification purposes,
“conservation” in the 1950s equated with increased storage capacity, not necessarily a re-
duction in consumption. But the committee was honest about the water problem: Mem-
bers did not blame the drought on “nature” and instead acknowledged the region's histor-
ically “erratic” water supply and conflicting water usage as the cause. 47 In other words, the
drought was the result of colliding environmental and cultural factors: a lack of rain and
high demands on a limited supply.
To solve the state's water woes, Water Use and Conservation Committee members
recommended additional storage capacity, improved wastewater treatment, and possible
changes to the state's riparian water law. The committee—comprised of professors, law-
yers, judges, business owners, extension agents, and federal employees—also suggested
that the governor or the legislature create a water administration office that could conduct
a statewide study to ascertain how much water the state had, withdrew from the ground,
and consumed in different sectors. The committee was cognizant of the state's diverse geo-
graphy and that no single plan could solve all of the state's water issues. They all agreed a
plan was necessary for future economic growth and that the General Assembly needed to
resolve the state's water problems as soon as possible. 48
While the Georgia Water Use and Conservation Committee advocated for state action to
protect Georgia's future water supply, some members recommended and accepted any and
all federal assistance. Columbus-based Jim Woodruff Sr. (1879-1963) was a radio station
owner and chairman of the Georgia Waterways Commission. Woodruff, who has also been
referred to as “the Father of the Chattahoochee,” wanted the state to “build multi-purpose
dams on tributaries” of the major rivers where the Corps was already building large dams
and reservoirs, including the Allatoona, Clarks Hill, Lanier, Seminole (Congress officially