WARNING:
JavaScript is turned OFF. None of the links on this concept map will
work until it is reactivated.
If you need help turning JavaScript On, click here.
This Concept Map, created with IHMC CmapTools, has information related to: Tri-State water war Stakeholders and their positions_woo, State of Georgia demand / recommend / claim / ... ????, Tri-State Conservation Coalition demand preserving the water quality and other environmental factors, State of Alabama claim the agreement would hurt Alabama’s water supply, irrigation, hydropower, and recreation (O'Day, Reece et al. 2008), Civil Society inlcudes Tri-State Conservation Coalition, Alabama inlcudes Government, Lake Lanier Association and the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) claim More water to Atalanta Metro area is needed to keep up the demand from growing population, Flordia incldues Local Population, State of Florida demands law suit against Georgia-USAE ageement. (O'Day, Reece et al. 2008), Georgia includes Civil Society, State of Alabama claim their agreement is against NEPA National Environmental Policy Act, Tri-State Conservation Coalition claims increased demands for consumptive water uses on the river system may threaten the ecology in Apalachicola Bay, Civil Society includes Lake Lanier Association and the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC), Local Population claims reduction in the Apalachicola River’s downstream flow affects estuarine productivity, hurting local fising community, Georgia includes Government, Southeastern Federal Power Customers (SeFPC) demands USAE should not manage Lake Lanier in a way that it inflates the price of electricity., Government includes State of Georgia, Government includes State of Florida, State of Florida claims reduction in the Apalachicola River’s downstream flow affects estuarine productivity, hurting local fising community, Private Sectors includes Southeastern Federal Power Customers (SeFPC), Flordia incldues Government