research spotlight

In “To Court Without the Corps? The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Florida v. Georgia,” Tyler McCreary, Ph.D., and Frank Schmitz, Ph.D., examine the role of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in a recent Supreme Court case about water allocation in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) river basin. 

The authors review the arguments and findings from the US Supreme Court decision “Florida v. Georgia.” This judicial case began with allegations of ecological damage due to upstream water overconsumption in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) river basin. However, the case ultimately revolved around the technical practices and regulation manuals of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, who operates the system of federal dams that impacts the flow of the Chattahoochee and Apalachicola rivers. Dr. McCreary and Dr. Schmitz examine the evidence and arguments presented in the Florida v. Georgia case and argue that the ecological disturbances and damages occurred in the Apalachicola watershed cannot be understood nor remedied without considering the history and management practices of the Corps in the ACF basin. 

The authors’ analysis of the Florida v. Georgia case highlights the importance to water governance of the policies, technical practices, and production of knowledge by engineers and other experts. More generally, the authors’ article suggest that Florida v. Georgia is a more general invitation for geographers to develop political ecologies that critically engage with the practices of engineers and experts in other transboundary river basins.