Alabama and Atlanta Water Dispute
http://www.al.com/news/birminghamnews/metro.ssf?/base/news/125421214169761.xml&coll=2&thispage=2
The dispute of water between Alabama and Atlanta is still going on and is only getting worse. A federal judge ordered Atlanta to stop drawing water from Lake Lanier in three years. This has caused some serious problems for Atlanta which is now searching for somewhere to draw water from. To solve this problem, Atlanta is planning to build a reservoir to pump 100 gallons a day to Atlanta.
Atlanta’s plan to build a reservoir sounds like a very good plan, however the author, Mary Orndorff, states her point in explaining that it is planned on being put on 2,000 acres of Dawson forest, a wildlife preserve, owned by the city of Atlanta. The plan of putting a water reservoir on a wildlife management area will not be very welcomed by the general public, but when it comes to needing water people may do whatever it takes. The plan also costs 650 million to build the reservoir.
Mary talks about the possible downstream impact of building the reservoir on Lake Lanier. However, she never talks about anything that will happen. It is unknown exactly what will happen until the reservoir is actually built but with a recent flood in Atlanta caused by twenty inches of rain. Lake Lanier is a huge lake that will not be easily drained or emptied.
The author talks a lot about how big of an impact losing the wildlife management area would be, but doesn’t talk about other possible building spots. For a project like this there would likely be multiple building spots up and down the river. Also, a reservoir would be controlled by dams, so if the Lake was lowering at a rate that was deemed too much, the water levels could be monitored.
Since Atlanta and Alabama are both countries in the Unites States, it is difficult to understand why they are fighting over water. With an argument of this magnitude, it is strange that the federal government doesn’t step in and make a final decision. If the government was to make a decision, they would most likely fulfill all citizens to have access to water resources. Considering that the government has not stepped in makes it seem like this is an issue that does not need to be handled immediately.
This article is a very good article and on the whole is not very bias. It was very informative and very well written. Although destroying the wildlife management area is bad, I think it would be best to build the reservoir there, because it could go well with the wildlife area to have a body of water there for the animals to drink and to possibly have more wildlife come in. If the problem of Atlanta not getting water is not solved soon, it might lead to people moving out of Atlanta which would hurt their economy.
Vasilinda, Mike. "Atlanta Floods May Bring Temporary Peace To Water Wars". Capitol News Service. September 30, 2009
I am a bit confused as to what your opinion is. You think that building there could help the wildlife, or destroy it? If they don't build a reservoir isn't there still going to be the body of water? How else would they get the water for the reservoir? Great job overall, just the conclusion was a bit contradicting in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteI think that you should have made your argument more clear as I am not really sure what your view was on this topic. You did however, bring forward some major flaws presented in this article. I think that you should have presented your argument as either against the water basin or for it because you were defending the wildlife sanctuary in the beginning but in your conclusion you stated that it would be good for the park. There are several pros and cons of either situation and it is a hard decision to make. Even though the reservoir would possibly harm the wildlife sanctuary, how else would Atlanta get their water? Good job on analyzing the article!
ReplyDeleteThe article you chose plays well into the category of water disputes. However, it was difficult to analyze because the author did not explicitly state strong opinions or statements. Therefore, your blog began to summarize more than examine the main points of the article. A lack of strong stated opinion, though, does not mean the author is "not very bias", as you have stated. From a preliminary examination of the article, bias is may not be immediately noticeable, but it may be shown through the selective process of the author concerning what should be included in the article. On the whole, good work!
ReplyDelete