‘Water war’ vs. Georgia may keep rolling along

However high court rules, experts expect continued legal fight.

TALLAHASSEE — Even if the U.S. Supreme Court gives Florida a favorable ruling in its lawsuit against Georgia over water flow into the Apalachicola River, the decision likely would result in more litigation and new legal challenges involving the decades-old water war between the states.

Those were the observations of five legal experts who on Thursday addressed a conference at Florida State University on the Apalachicola River and Apalachicola Bay system. The conference was put together by the Florida Conservation Coalition, a group headed by former U.S. officials have expressed optimism Sen. and Gov. Bob Graham. about the case based

The U.S. Supreme Court on the tone of justices’ questions in January heard oral arguments during oral arguments, in Florida’s challenge Jonathan Williams, a former to a special master’s report deputy solicitor general for that found Florida had not the state, said he was taking proved its case that a water-usage a cautious view. cap should be imposed “Oral arguments are often on Georgia to help the river not great predictors of what and Apalachicola Bay. Georgia the ultimate outcome is going has asked the nation’s to be, particularly in cases that highest court to uphold the are as complicated as this one report, arguing that a consumption is,” said Williams, who was cap would damage involved in the case while he Georgia’s economy and was with the Attorney General’s agriculture industry. Office. He is now in private

Florida has asked for the practice with the firm case to be sent back to the Lash & Goldberg. court-appointed special master Although the arguments for more hearings on a “went well,” Williams said. plan for an “equitable” distribution “there are a lot of unsettled of water in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint issues in this case right now, and there are a lot of thorny river basin. issues the special master will

Although the lawyers on have to work through in the Thursday’s panel and Florida event the case gets remanded to him.”

If the case continues, a key issue in developing an “equitable apportionment” of water in the river system would be weighing the benefits to Florida against the cost to Georgia. Florida has said a diminished water flow has harmed the Apalachicola ecosystem as well as the seafood industry, while Georgia has said a consumption cap could hurt the economic growth of the Atlanta region and impact a multibillion-dollar agriculture industry in southwest Georgia.

Richard Hamann, a retired law professor from the University of Florida, said he is “pretty optimistic” about Florida’s case, having once thought the state would have difficulty proving harm had been done.

But if Florida wins the current case, he likened it to “the dog chasing the car.”

“When you catch it, what do you get?” he asked. He said it may be difficult developing an accurate mechanism to measure a consumption cap.

“If we get there, I think that would be a huge challenge,” Hamann said. “But I certainly look forward to seeing that day.”

Jason Oyler, a lawyer with the Susquehanna River Basin Commission in Pennsylvania, said the case would likely lead to more litigation that could “go on for decades upon decades.”

He and other lawyers on the panel said there are relatively few water cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court to give a clear indication of the outcome of the Florida-Georgia case.

“I think there could be twists and turns, even with a relatively favorable ruling, on that kind of economic analysis,” he said. “And there are some pitfalls there.”

Melissa Samet, a lawyer with the National Wildlife Federation, described a related lawsuit challenging a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers water-management plan for the river basin issued last year.

Samet said her organization filed a legal challenge to both the “water control manual” as well as the environmental impact statement that accompanied the plan. The case was filed in Washington and joined a similar lawsuit filed by Alabama, also challenging the water plan and environmental document.