Debates over species and water allocation are generally thought of as a hallmark of western water conflicts. (Issues concerning water management per se and the conflicts among other users (e.g., municipal use, electrical generation, irrigation, and navigation) are analyzed in CRS Report RL34326, Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) Drought: Federal Water Management Issues , by [author name scrubbed] et al.) Habitat in the upper basin has undergone profound alteration, while the lower basin has been less altered. On April 15, 2008, the Corps incorporated elements of the previous Emergency Operating Plan and added other changes to form a revised IOP (RIOP); it submitted the RIOP to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). The Four Species: A Sturgeon and Three Mussels

A focal point of the debate on management of the ACF basin during drought has been protection of four notably uncharismatic protected species: the threatened Gulf sturgeon ( Acipenser oxyrinchus desotoi ), the endangered fat threeridge mussel ( Amblema neislerii ), the threatened Chipola slabshell mussel ( Elliptio chipolaensis ), and the threatened purple bankclimber mussel ( Elliptoideus sloatianus ). Among the issues mentioned in the rationale for adopting EDO and its lower minimum flows was reducing "the demand of storage in order to ... provide greater assurance of future ability to sustain flows for listed species during a severe multi-year drought, as currently being experienced in the ACF basin." In addition to the fish flesh itself, the fish were prized for caviar. For instance, if water flows remained low, but all communities and industries in the basin were to improve their pollution levels markedly, might the species tolerate an even lower flow, in light of this improvement? suspension of requirements for a maximum fall rate (0.25 ft/day) if water storage drops to a specified level and the Corps is operating under a drought plan. FWS concludes that the RIOP would not jeopardize the four listed species, nor would it adversely modify their critical habitat. River flow reduction, whether through drought or increased upstream use, could have serious adverse consequences for oyster populations. Thus far in 2008, investigations of Apalachicola Bay and the lower Apalachicola River indicate conditions similar to 2007, with record duration of low flows, yielding conditions similar to an exceptional drought. The June 1, 2008, BiOp notes that, although two species of sea turtles and the West Indian manatee may sometimes occur in Apalachicola Bay or the lower Apalachicola River, any effects of the proposed action on these species would likely be insignificant, due to their low numbers and only occasional seasonal residence in the river and bay. Circuit Court held that, pursuant to the Water Supply Act, the Corps lacked congressional authority to enter into the Lake Lanier storage contracts in a 2003 agreement with the State of Georgia and other parties. For instance, differences in the timing of releases from Lake Lanier for in-stream hydropower uses and releases for off-stream, consumptive municipal uses potentially could affect the stored volume, as well as in-stream flows, at a particular time. How the Endangered Species Act Works: Consultation
Under the ESA (16 U.S.C. It must also include the opinion on whether the agency's action:
(a) is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat (a no jeopardy opinion ); or
(b) is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat (a jeopardy opinion ), and if so whether:
(1) any RPAs would avoid jeopardy or adverse modification, or
(2) there are no RPAs; i.e., there appear to be no RPAs consistent with both the agency's proposed action and avoidance of jeopardy and/or adverse modification. Appendix B. NEPA in the Context of the Exceptional Drought Operations and ESA
Timing and Content
A factor in the Corps' plan to release less water is whether an environmental review document, such as an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), is required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C §§ 4321 et seq.).
Drought in the Southeast has brought congressional attention to an ongoing interstate water conflict among Alabama, Florida, and Georgia over water allocation and management of the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) basin. Reservoir drawdown and predictions for a continued drought have Georgia's upper basin municipal and industrial customers concerned about depleting their principal (in some cases, their only) water supply, Lake Lanier in northern Georgia. Alabama, Florida, and Georgia's lower basin interests are concerned about sustaining river flows to meet their municipal, agricultural, electrical, recreational, and ecosystem needs. In addition, four federally protected species, once widely distributed but now confined to the lower basin, are caught in the controversy.
The issue for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is how to manage ACF federal reservoirs, now at record low levels, to meet needs in the upper and lower basin equitably. The challenge includes complying with federal law (e.g., the Endangered Species Act (ESA)); minimizing harm to the ACF basin and Apalachicola Bay species, ecosystems, recreation, fishing, and oyster industry; and providing flows for hydropower and thermoelectric cooling, while also meeting water needs of the Atlanta region, other communities, and industries.
To varying degrees, the ACF drought has lasted for several years, depleting water supplies, with Lake Lanier being the largest source for downstream needs. The Corps has released water at various times from Lake Lanier to meet minimum flow requirements in the lower basin—to the consternation of upper basin users. As an emergency drought response in 2007, the Corps began to reduce flows in the Apalachicola River, thereby slowing the drawdown of Lake Lanier, though heavy rains in early 2008 in the lower basin temporarily halted extra releases from Lake Lanier. The Corps' Revised Interim Operating Plan (RIOP) calls for three operational seasons, contingencies for drought operations, and additional water storage before and after a drought phase. It differs from previous plans in allowing water flows to fall to a specified level during drought without additional ESA consultation. In addition, a previous agreement to limit the rate of reduction in flow (to allow species to move to deeper water) will end under certain conditions. Judging that the Corps' actions would not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or adversely modify their critical habitat, the Fish and Wildlife Service issued a Biological Opinion on June 1, 2008, that approved the RIOP.
Four species protected under the Endangered Species Act—three mussels and a sturgeon—depend on Apalachicola River flows. The impacts of the RIOP on these species continue to be the subject of study and debate. Yet the four are not the focus of debate. Rather the law itself acts as a hammer, forcing parties to reach decisions that may produce winners and losers. As climate change and population growth continue to affect ecosystems, ESA controversies may be at the center of still more stormy debates. Responses of the various parties in the ACF and species protection controversy may presage responses to future river management controversies in other regions.