Water policy is very complex and takes a good bit of studying to master. We do not believe that we have mastered the subject , but can provide a unique prospective and offer suggestions. Agriculture across the US, in Georgia especially, have been in debates for years over various issues regarding water and its agricultural use.
Hopefully those of you involved in production agriculture have been made aware of the EPA and Army Corp of Engineers new “Waters of the US” proposed rule (comment period ends July 21) regarding jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Basically this is to clarify the contradicting and confusing opinions stated in several different Supreme Court cases about what exactly is covered in the CWA. In short, the proposed rule states that “normal farming practices” will be exempt just like they currently are. The main concern here is that the EPA/Corp may say that “normal farming practices” are exempt, but the new rule makes it seem like pretty much any water flowing off of your property, whether that flow is always there or just runoff from rain, if that flow is hydrologically connected to a larger tributary falls under the CWA. This has huge implications for Georgia as many of our farming areas are surrounded by small creeks and drainage ditches that may eventually end up in a tributary or directly into a river. At first glance this may seem logical or like a good idea. But once you dive in deeper you realize that this would give the federal government drastically more control over private lands. Not to mention that this would open up farmers to a whole host of anti-agriculture groups who could sue a farmer if the group thought the farmer was not in compliance of the CWA (section 505 of CWA). This new proposed rule should be watched closely by all ag groups.
Regarding Georgia water policy: EPD Director Turner stated recently that we should learn more about the suit Florida brought against Georgia regarding water flows into the Apalachicola Bay. This is a continuation of the long time water wars between the states and I doubt it will end any time soon. Also this legislative year the Georgia General Assembly passed SB 213 to amend the Flint River Drought Protection Act. You can read about SB213 here (too much to summarize). The bill had lots of support throughout the ag community and we think it is a step in the right direction for Georgia. The main drive behind the bill was to protect farmers from third party lawsuits like the Aransas case in Texas and the various lawsuits in the western US regarding endangered species. SB213 also gives the state more authority during times of drought to help augment stream flows. This was controversial to some groups, but in the end I think everyone agreed that this solution is better than having the federal government regulate stream flows like they do in many western state. Farmers in some parts of California get a water ration from the government, and in times of drought they may not even get water, which means they basically can’t farm certain crops. Our hope is that Georgia never get to this situation.