U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-09-2019, 02:58 PM
 
30,270 posts, read 28,276,318 times
Reputation: 11089

Advertisements

Has the U.S. Supreme Court ever looked at the Georgia Tennessee boundary dispute with knowledge of all the facts at hand (including modern, accurate surveying technology)?

It's my understanding the Supremes are specifically designated in the Constitution to decide these issues. If they have already ruled on it, so be it.

If not, put the facts before them and let them decide. Whatever the decision is, I will accept it.

This issue doesn't seem far-fetched at all to me. As recently as the last 20 years the Supreme Court has heard and settled long standing boundary disputes between New York and New Jersey, and between Nebraska and Colorado. Why not this one?


ETA: I agree with the aqueduct suggestion! It would be grand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-09-2019, 04:05 PM
 
Location: Columbus, GA
978 posts, read 462,999 times
Reputation: 675
Quote:
Originally Posted by aries4118 View Post
But I will say this...


I would make for a lovely aqueduct flowing and pumping from that location to supply water to the Capital of the American South about 100 miles out.
The topography in Dade County would make it a logistical nightmare to pump water through.

If Georgia ever somehow reached a deal with Tenn. state to rights of a large amount of water from the Tennessee, it'd be much simpler to put the pump on Lake Chickamauga and build the pipes straight along I-75.

But I don't think there's any similar agreement between states importing water from other states to model off of, and the legislature's current tactics don't inspire cooperation, plus that size aqueduct doesn't make as much economic sense and would face major environmental resistance.

The answer to Atlanta's water issues is largely going to be solved by conservation, in three parts; personal consumption, additional reservoirs, and many new or upgraded wastewater treatment facilities and infrastructure.

Today Atlanta metro per capita consumes nearly half the water it used in 2000 and the public is still educated or financially prompted to conserve water use. The public has to learn to treat water as a precious resource. If you're interested in learning how to best do your part.

In addition a couple planned or suggested reservoirs would help serve the metro's growing needs; Richland Creek in Paulding and Bear Creek in Fulton.

Finally, many new or upgraded WWT facilities will have to be built by the various counties in addition to new water and sewage lines which will minimize loss.

That and keep your fingers and toes crossed for no long lasting droughts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arjay57 View Post

This issue doesn't seem far-fetched at all to me. As recently as the last 20 years the Supreme Court has heard and settled long standing boundary disputes between New York and New Jersey, and between Nebraska and Colorado. Why not this one?
See Virginia vs Tennessee (1893)

Quote:
The court decided that if a prior agreement between the two states set the boundary, both states ratify that agreement, and subsequently one state discovers that the boundary was wrong (e.g. the other state received a larger share of territory than originally planned), in the absence of the other state agreeing to change it, the original agreement stands.
That's basically the exact same scenario your proposing.

As for the two recent cases you mention; NY v NJ, the court held that the long standing boundary agreement held precedence, which in our proposed Ga v Tn case would go against Ga. And I guess the NE v CO case you mean the Republican River dispute? That didn't have anything to do with state borders, Ne was basically stealing water and had to pay damages to CO and Kansas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2019, 04:51 PM
 
30,270 posts, read 28,276,318 times
Reputation: 11089
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayHey View Post
See Virginia vs Tennessee (1893)
Quote:
The court decided that if a prior agreement between the two states set the boundary, both states ratify that agreement, and subsequently one state discovers that the boundary was wrong (e.g. the other state received a larger share of territory than originally planned), in the absence of the other state agreeing to change it, the original agreement stands.
That's basically the exact same scenario your proposing.
Well, I appreciate what you are saying, but in this situation, is there a prior agreement between Georgia and Tennessee that has been ratified by both states?

No need to argue here, but I'm inclined to just put the issue before the Supreme Court. If they don't think it's worthy of consideration I'm sure they will say so.

In the meantime maybe the two states can work out a deal. That would be great!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2019, 05:06 PM
 
15,648 posts, read 28,583,629 times
Reputation: 19399
Post about Atlanta til your fingers wear out. Posts about Phoenix or anywhere else are off topic and will be deleted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2019, 05:13 PM
 
1,601 posts, read 829,012 times
Reputation: 1281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro View Post
Very interesting. Of all the cities I have concerned about running out of water, I never considered Atlanta metro to be in any immediate danger of this.

One interesting thing about Florida is how they are surrounded on three sides by water but how heavily dependent they are on the Chattahoochee River. I kind of wish this country could step up on Desinaltion in some form of making it more cost effective.

I've always been concerned more of Austin or DFW running out of water than Atlanta given both get much less rain however.
Why do you believe desalination is not cost effective when California has several and the article notes El Paso just built one?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2019, 05:25 PM
 
1,601 posts, read 829,012 times
Reputation: 1281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro View Post
Very interesting. Of all the cities I have concerned about running out of water, I never considered Atlanta metro to be in any immediate danger of this.

One interesting thing about Florida is how they are surrounded on three sides by water but how heavily dependent they are on the Chattahoochee River. I kind of wish this country could step up on Desinaltion in some form of making it more cost effective.

I've always been concerned more of Austin or DFW running out of water than Atlanta given both get much less rain however.
Atlanta rainfall is likely above average at 47 inches, D/FW is over 37 inches and Austin is 35. That said, those rainfall totals and a multi-year drought in the 1950s resulted in the building of all the lakes around D/FW and the lakes west of Austin. A new lake is going up north east of DFW that should be ready by 2024. Southeast of Austin, a rainfall capture pool is being built to pipe west towards Austin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2019, 06:44 PM
 
5,634 posts, read 3,815,192 times
Reputation: 3855
Was this thread really merged into a thread that started 12 years ago and whose last post was 4.5 years ago? Seems like a related, but separate discussion. I find it jarring when such old threads are merged with new ones.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2019, 08:03 PM
 
498 posts, read 264,057 times
Reputation: 703
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayHey View Post

The Apalachicola system is important in keeping the unique system of wetlands and inland forests along the river and the Apalachicola Bay estuary healthy.

That may be what fl is saying but it's not true and flys in the face of common sense. The water battle with fl is about one thing and one thing only - money. By way of the oyster industry. If you read into the actual court docs it's all there. What fl is asking for is completely un-natual.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2019, 08:22 PM
 
Location: Columbus, GA
978 posts, read 462,999 times
Reputation: 675
I don't really follow your point. Yes in court Florida is protecting itself from damages created by not having its water supply. That water supply is the entire Apalachicola system.

That's the opposite of unnatural, is true, and makes perfect sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2019, 08:54 PM
 
6,642 posts, read 6,204,765 times
Reputation: 4596
Quote:
Originally Posted by walker1962 View Post
Atlanta rainfall is likely above average at 47 inches, D/FW is over 37 inches and Austin is 35. That said, those rainfall totals and a multi-year drought in the 1950s resulted in the building of all the lakes around D/FW and the lakes west of Austin. A new lake is going up north east of DFW that should be ready by 2024. Southeast of Austin, a rainfall capture pool is being built to pipe west towards Austin.
The weather station at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport recorded over 70 inches of precipitation in 2018 while other parts of North Georgia (particularly the mountains of extreme North Georgia which is home to the watersheds for the Chattahoochee and Etowah rivers that supply water to metro Atlanta) appeared receive upwards of 85-90 inches of precipitation in 2018.

… That level of precipitation that was more than twice what Texas metros like Dallas/Fort Worth and Austin receive on average seems like it would be more than adequate for the construction of similar rainfall capture infrastructure on a larger scale in the greater Atlanta region, particularly in parts of the extreme North Georgia Mountains where some areas appear to average upwards of 80 inches of precipitation annually.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

¬© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top