RSS
Home › News › Local News
Mandatory water restrictions in place for roughly 50 percent of Anderson County water customers
STORY TOOLS
Share and Enjoy
More Local News
- Anderson County Council hires investigative lawyer, accountant
- Anderson County’s former county attorney now works for Oconee
- Bosch deadline for Anderson plant is Friday
Rate this Article
ANDERSON COUNTY — Nine of Anderson County's 13 water districts are taking steps to alleviate pressure caused by a persistent drought.
Representatives of the districts told media representatives at a news conference in Anderson Thursday morning that a group decision among the water districts would affect more than 36,000 water customers and take effect immediately.
“It’s time for mandatory water restrictions,” said Chuck Cortez, manager of the Big Creek and Hammond water districts.
A 30 percent cut in water use is needed from residential customers in addition to a 25 percent cut from businesses in Big Creek, Williamston, Hammond, Broadway, Homeland Park, Starr-Iva, West Anderson, Sandy Springs and Highway 88 water districts, officials said.
That means the elimination of lawn watering, home car washes and the filling of pools, Cortezsaid. The restrictions will have no impact on commercial car washing or new service for residential or business customers, but no water taps will be issued for irrigation purposes, he said.
And fire departments in the affected districts are being asked for cooperation in refraining from using water during training exercises and eliminating non-fire related use of hydrants, Cortez said.
After the meeting, the county’s top fire official said he does not see any major problems with the new restrictions. Anderson County Fire Chief Billy Gibson said his departments are prepared to cooperate and would eliminate the washing of fire trucks and refrain from water use except when fighting fires.
Powdersville, Pioneer, Belton-Honea Path and the city of Anderson water districts, which serve close to 50 percent of the county's other water customers, are not part of the restrictions.
The cuts now mandated Thursday by the other water districts are based on an almost 21-foot drop in the level of Hartwell Lake, which is the county’s water source, officials said.
Cortez said the group is lobbying with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to arrange for an almost 15 percent cut in Corps water releases from Hartwell Dam, saving 100 million gallons a day if the Corps cuts its releases from 3,600 cubic feet a second to 3,100 cubic feet a second.
Comments
There are 6 responses to this article.
Comments are meant to offer our readers a forum for thoughtful, robust debate about local issues.
Comments are moderated, but you may find the content of the conversations offensive, objectionable or factually disputable.
IndependentMail.com does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post or respond to every suggestion for a comment to be removed.
Before you post, consider this:
Please read our official user-contributions policy.
I am told that the 3600 cfs that the Corps of Engineers releases down the Savannah is 2.3 Billion gallons per day. The water used by the Anderson area water districts is a trickle in comparison.
The Corps voluntarily reduced releases from Thurmond in late Oct '07 from 4000 cfs to 3600 cfs, a 10% reduction. The LHA requested that the Corps take additional action to reduce the releases a year ago. Earlier this fall the Corps said that they were going to fast-track the reduction of releases. We are still waiting, and waiting, and waiting...and the lakes get lower, and lower, and lower...
And Hartwell, and Thurmond can go back down to the original river bed if need be, they were built for FLOOD CONTROL and POWER GENERATION! When are you people going to get this through your heads. Hartwell, and Thurmond were not built so people could have a lake house, or ride around on ski doo's, they were built to control flooding on the Savannah River.
in response to 2much4U
Regarding why the dam was built (below is copied from the corps website)
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Savannah District operates three interconnected dams and lakes in the upper reaches of the Savannah River Basin - Hartwell, Richard B. Russell, and J. Strom Thurmond. Together they form a scenic chain of lakes 120 miles long. To make the most complete use of the basin's water resources, the lakes are managed as a multipurpose integrated system, giving consideration to all Congressionally authorized purposes - hydropower, flood control, recreation, fish and wildlife, water quality, water supply, and downstream navigation.
I daresay if the dam were constructed today, one of the main purposes would be drought mitigation, which falls under water supply, but in todays drier climate, has an even higher profile than flooding.
I think folks like 2much4U are missing the point. Do they not think that things could have been managed better going into the drought (3 years ago), so that we wouldn't quite be at this point right now? Are they so confident in the amount of each and every release of water that was made in that time for whatever reason? Many of us are not confident that releasing above the minimums as we were headed into drought, getting much less inflow was the right thing to do. How much different would the reservoirs look now if we had only let out the true minimum necessary since January of 2006, for example. By true minimum I mean that elusive number that we still can't pinpoint...is it 3600, 3200, 3100. Yesterday someone from the Corp mentioned to me that we may be able to go to 3000 or 2000 in the future. We need to know true minimums of the system. If we need to fund Phase II of the Comp. Basin Study to do that, for everyone's sake, let's do it. I would not deny the factory owner on the river the ability to operate his plant, I would not tell the City of Savannah to build a desalination plant and leave the water in the River, and I would not expect all the spawning fish to die and be lost to our ecosystem, but I would ask that we truly conserve in the dryer future we face and that we know what our true minimums are and go to them sooner so that all stakeholders (yes, even the lakehouse owners) can suffer less. 40 years of development and integration into the economy of the area make the lake a bigger asset to region than folks like 2much4U want to admit. It's easy to point a finger and talk about seadoo usage, but has 2much4U spoken the the owners of the marinas, the builders, drywallers, electricians, dock makers, restaurant owners, whose household incomes have plummeted along with the lake levels. I think all we can hope for is that the Corps and the states recognize their mistakes and vow to manage the basin differently when we recover, as they seem to think we can. I hope they are right.
Blah, blah, blah.... Oh, it seems I must have steeped on a lake house owner or 2 toes. The only lake on the list that is recreation is Russell, the other 2 are flood control and Hydro power. If all of you cry babies would go stand over the lake when you cried, the lake would be overflowing!
Again...from the Corps..."the lakes are managed as a multipurpose integrated system, giving consideration to all Congressionally authorized purposes - hydropower, flood control, recreation, fish and wildlife, water quality, water supply, and downstream navigation" 2much4U, you seem very hostile and your remark about standing over the lake and crying into it is the kind of thing my 10 year old might say. Until the basin is managed holistically all stakeholders' are in jeopardy. Grow up and try to put some thought into your comments, or please just don't post them.
(Requires free registration.)