Bill Overview
Title: Chattahoochee River Act
Description: This bill requires the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to provide design and construction assistance for water-related resource protection and restoration projects that affect the Chattahoochee River Basin. The basin is located in Georgia, Alabama, and Florida. Specifically, the bill requires USACE to provide assistance to state and local agencies and tribal entities for projects that include (1) sediment and erosion control, (2) ecosystem restoration, (3) protection of essential public works, and (4) the beneficial uses of dredged material. Further, the bill requires USACE, stakeholders, and state and local agencies to develop a comprehensive Chattahoochee River Basin restoration plan. The plan must give priority to eligible projects that will also improve the quality or quantity of the water or that use natural hydrological features and systems.
Sponsors: Sen. Ossoff, Jon [D-GA]
Target Audience
Population: Residents and stakeholders in the Chattahoochee River Basin
Estimated Size: 2000000
- The Chattahoochee River Basin covers a geographical region with a significant human population spread across three states: Georgia, Alabama, and Florida.
- The projects include sediment and erosion control, ecosystem restoration, and protection of essential public works, which indicates benefits to flood management, water quality, and environmental health, all of which directly affect human populations relying on these systems.
- Restoration and protection of water resources generally improve public health outcomes and quality of life for nearby residents.
- The river basin provides critical water resources for metropolitan areas such as Atlanta, affecting millions of residents.
- Ecosystem restoration and the beneficial uses of dredged material can positively impact economic activities such as agriculture, tourism, and fishing, affecting those working in these sectors.
Reasoning
- The Chattahoochee River Basin spans three states and covers both urban and rural areas.
- The population that directly interacts with the river includes a wide array of stakeholders such as local residents, farmers, and business owners relying on water quality and availability.
- The policy has a budget limit, which means that while some projects may have significant impacts, others may not be funded or receive minimal attention.
- Most stakeholders will experience some level of benefit from the policy, especially those directly involved in land management and agriculture due to improvements in water quality.
- Improved ecosystem health can lead to indirect benefits through increased recreational opportunities and enhanced local economies.
- Each person's experience with the policy will vary based on proximity to the projects and their direct interaction with the river's resources.
Simulated Interviews
Urban Planner (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see the Chattahoochee River Act as a crucial step towards sustainable development.
- Urban environments such as Atlanta significantly benefit from water protection and restoration initiatives.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Retired Fisherman (Columbus, GA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The river's health is vital for our local fishing activities.
- I'm concerned about sediment affecting fish populations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Environmental Scientist (Rome, GA)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is essential for long-term environmental health.
- Comprehensive restoration plans are needed for true impact.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
Farmer (Montgomery, AL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our farm's productivity is linked to water quality.
- I hope this policy prioritizes agricultural needs along the river.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Freelance Writer (Opelika, AL)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The Chattahoochee River holds cultural significance.
- Restoration efforts could enrich my writing subjects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Tourism Operator (Tallahassee, FL)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Healthy ecosystems boost my tourism business.
- I support any efforts maintaining river biodiversity.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
Elementary School Teacher (Auburn, AL)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Educating young students on river conservation is crucial.
- Policy initiatives foster better learning experiences.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Retired State Park Ranger (Dothan, AL)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Protection of natural resources is vital for future generations.
- I'm optimistic about the policy's focus on preservation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 6 |
Real Estate Developer (Gainesville, GA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Water projects often affect development plans.
- Balanced policies help in maintaining property value.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Community Organizer (Albany, GA)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improving water quality directly impacts community health.
- Collaboration between agencies is critical for success.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $70000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $90000000)
Year 2: $71000000 (Low: $51000000, High: $91000000)
Year 3: $72000000 (Low: $52000000, High: $92000000)
Year 5: $73000000 (Low: $53000000, High: $93000000)
Year 10: $75000000 (Low: $55000000, High: $95000000)
Year 100: $80000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $100000000)
Key Considerations
- The complexity of integrating tribal, state, and local stakeholders in decision-making and project implementation requires effective communication and agreement on priorities.
- Environmental impacts may take years to fully materialize, necessitating sustained funding beyond initial projections.
- Coordination with ongoing regional and state water management plans for synergy and efficiency.