|
The multipurpose dam
and reservoir project for the Clark Hill site was not authorized until
1944, but interest had been kept alive through the efforts of Augusta
community leaders such as Lester Moody, Chairman of the Chamber of
Commerce; Dick Allen, Mayor of Augusta; Tom Hamilton, Editor of the
Augusta Chronicle; and other members of the Savannah River
Improvement Commission. In May 1935 Colonel Creswell Garlington,
District Engineer, invited these men to Savannah to discuss the
Savannah River development. Garlington told the group that they should
press their case by tying navigation improvements, flood control, and
power together and focusing on the Clark Hill site as the location for
a dam that would accomplish these objectives2.
The Augusta
delegation, impressed with the District Engineer's suggestion, went to
Norfolk to enlist the aid of Division Engineer, Earl I. Brown. On
recommendation, the group then met twice with General Edwin M.
Markham, Chief of Engineers. After securing the support of Georgia
Senators F. George and Richard Russell and of Congressman Paul Brown
of the Congressional District, they approached the President himself.
On 8 August 1935after several months of document preparation and
project analysis, President Roosevelt appointed a special board to
investigate the possibility of constructing the Clark Hill and other
proposed dams north of Augusta. In October a public hearing was held
in Augusta. The findings from this meeting were forwarded to the
President in February 1937. As a result of all of this action and
interest, the Committee on Commerce of the U.S. Senate passed a
resolution on 1 November 1938 that called on the Board of Engineers
for Rivers and Harbors to review the 308 Report on the Savannah River
“with a view to determining the advisability of constructing a
reservoir on the Savannah River at the site known as Clark Hill for
the development of hydroelectric power" as well as for aiding
navigation of the river below Augusta and "for other beneficial
effects.”3 The review, conducted by the Savannah District
office, was submitted through the Board of Engineers for Rivers and
Harbors and the Secretary of War to the Committee on Commerce on 22
Apri11939. Although World War II diverted the nation's attention from
this and other civil works projects, the Augusta group retained their
vision for the development of the Savannah River Basin.4
The next
comprehensive study of the upper basin was completed in 1943. The
report that resulted from this survey was included in House Document
657, 78th Congress, 2d session, and was based on authorization that
predated the war.5 Colonel Peter A. Feringa, the District
Engineer who was responsible for the study, reported that the Savannah
River Basin offered an exceptional opportunity for developing
multipurpose projects and that the best plan for developing the water
resources of the basin would start with the construction of the Clark
Hill development, to include a full power pool of 335 feet above mean
sea level. The District Engineer went on to recommend that the Clark
Hill project should be followed, in order, by the Hartwell, the Goat
Island, and the Middleton N Shoals Dams on the Savannah River; the
Camp Creek, the Rogues Ford, the, Sand Bottom, and the War Woman Dams
on the Chattooga River; the Tallow Hill and Anthony Shoals Dams on the
Broad River; and possibly, in the distant future, dams at the
Newry-Old Pickens site on the upper Seneca River.6 The
report added that other advantages such as reduction of dredging costs
in Savannah Harbor; reduction of saltwater intrusion into the lower
reaches of the river; and benefits to recreation, wildlife,
and general industrial development could be expected from constructing
this system of dams. Flood control, navigation improvement, and power
development remained, however, the primary justifications for the
projects. This general plan for developing the upper Savannah River
Basin was approved, and construction of the Clark Hill Dam was
authorized in Public Law 534, 78th Congress, passed on 22 December
1944, The Clark Hill Reservoir, the first of the multipurpose projects
to be completed in the comprehensive river basin development plan, is
approximately 22 , miles above Augusta. The project report, completed
in May 1946, called for the dam to have a total length of 5,682 feet,
including a concrete section 2,282 feet long flanked on either end by
earthen embankments. The height of the concrete dam was planned for
200 feet. A 1,096-foot spillway was to span the main river channel.
The spillway would be topped by 23 tainter gates, each 40 feet long by
35 feet high, which could be opened to release water from the
reservoir pool. The plan called for a reservoir with a maximum
elevation of 335 feet above mean sea level. The top five feet of this
maximum pool would be used for flood control, and the pool between
elevation 305 and 330 was planned for power generation. When
completed, this would be one of the largest inland bodies of water in
the South.7 The reservoir impounded by the dam would extend
39.4 miles up the Savannah River and would have a surface area of
78,500 acres. The shoreline would be approximately 1,200 miles long.8
Top
of Page
Construction at the Clark Hill site began on 1 August 1946 with the
letting of a contract for the access railroad. That same year, a
contract was let for diverting the river from its normal channel, and
in 1947 construction of the first-stage cofferdam in the original
channel began. Both east and west earth embankments were partially
constructed and a temporary bridge to carry vehicular and rail traffic
was erected across the river downstream from the dam site. During 1946
and 1947, sub-surface seismic exploration of foundation conditions and
of the quarry site was also in progress. An excellent quality of
granite was found within one mile of the dam, and a later decision to
manufacture fine aggregate and sand from the same granite material
allowed for close control of the quality of the concrete used in the
dam construction.9 The contract for the dam was awarded in
November 1947. The construction plant for this work, costing $2.5
million, was completed by October 1948. The plant consisted of
quarrying facilities, primary and secondary crushers, a systern of
conveyors for transporting the aggregate in its various gradations,
and a concrete mixing plant capable of producing 200 cubic yards of
concrete per hour. Three revolving gantry cranes with 125-foot booms
capable of placing a four-yard concrete bucket anywhere within the
area of construction were mounted on a steel trestle erected parallel
to the axis of the dam.10
The composition of
the concrete to be used in the dam was researched extensively to find
the right "recipe" for providing maximum strength. This was necessary
because the dam was designed as a gravity-type structure in which the
weight of the dam is always greater than the weight of the water
pushing against it. To prevent the concrete in the dam from cracking
from pressure and weather conditions, the "setting" process had to be
controlled rigidly. In order to reduce the heat of hydration within
the mixture during the curing stage, ice was used in the concrete mix.
The ice was provided by two compressors capable of producing 150 tons
of ice daily. In another effort to achieve maximum strength, 20
percent natural cement was mixed with typical portland cement, sand
and gravel from local granite material, and air entraining agents.
William T. Neelands, the Engineer technician in charge of this phase
of construction, was considered an expert in masonry construction.11
After completion of
the cofferdam on the Georgia side of the river, the rock bed of the
channel was excavated and prepared, and the first concrete was placed
in October 1948. By the following May, initial construction of the
spillway section had been completed. The second-stage cofferdam then
was constructed, restoring the river to its original channel where it
flowed through the eight sluiceways provided in the spillway section.
Construction operations moved to the South Carolina side of the river.12
When work was to
begin behind the second-stage cofferdam, the Engineers discovered a
fault in the rock bed of the river. After thorough investigation, it
was determined that satisfactory foundation conditions could be
obtained by inserting concrete into the fault under pressure. Concrete
operations on the main dam, however, were not resumed until January
1950, in part because of the nationwide steel strike in the fall of
1949. By November 1950, the intake section of the dam, which would
service the powerhouse, was near completion. The spillway crest was
completed by July 1951, and work had been started on raising the
concrete piers for the tainter gate installations.13
Top
of Page
Meanwhile, contracts
for the main generating units were placed in the summer of 1949, and a
contract for the construction of the powerhouse was awarded in October
1950. Each of the generators required 32 railroad cars to transport it
to the site.14 The downstream arm of the second-stage
cofferdam had been left in place to facilitate construction of the
powerhouse. Because of a shortage of materials due to the military
requirements of the Korean conflict, this phase of the project lagged
from its beginning. However, by July 1952 the powerhouse was 60
percent completed.15 The first generating unit was
operating by November 1952, and the first electrical power from the
dam was transmitted to South Carolina in January 1953.16
Six remaining units went into operation between February 1953 and July
1954.17 At that time the project was considered be complete
at a cost of almost $78.5 million.18 The estimated cost of
the entire project at its inception in 1944 had been $35.3 million.
The work on the Clark Hill project, however, was not without problems.
Perhaps the most serious of these was the dispute between the Corps of
Engineers and private power corporations in the fall of 1946. The
events leading to the conflict began as early as 7 August 1928, when
the Federal Power Commission issued Permit No.798 to the Savannah
River Electric Company, a subsidiary of the Georgia Power Company, for
the construction, operation, and maintenance of a hydroelectric
project at the Clark Hill Dam site. In 1932, because of the depressed
economy and a consequent lack of demand for electric power, the
company surrendered its license. As already noted, in 1935 a group of
representatives from Augusta and the Augusta Chamber of Commerce began
negotiations with the Corps of Engineers for the development of the
Savannah River Basin. Before pursuing their objectives in Washington,
D.C., however, is group met with the President of the Savannah River
Electric Company, P.S. Arkwright. He assured the group that his
company had no desire to revive plans for a hydroelectric plant at the
Clark Hill site. Mr. Arkwright "pledged his cooperation and stated
that his company would be interested in purchasing the power at the
switchboard if and when the project was completed.”19
Moreover, he expressed willingness to cooperate again on 2 October
1935 at a hearing in Augusta before the special board that had been
appointed by President Roosevelt to investigate the Savannah River
Basin project. The Corps of Engineers then began to develop the
project as discussed earlier.
In August 1946 the
preliminary work on the Clark Hill project was halted by President
Truman's freeze order in response to the depressed economic conditions
following World War II. Taking advantage of this situation, the
Savannah River Electric Company applied for a renewal of its license
to build the plant.20 This action introduced the issue of
whether the Government or private corporations could best provide
electric power for public consumption. During October and November
1946, the Federal Power Commission held public hearings in Atlanta
relating to the power company's application. Perhaps not
coincidentally, President Truman lifted his freeze order on the Clark
Hill construction funds, and work was resumed in late November under
the direction of the Corps of Engineers.21 In January 1947
the Federal Power Commission ruled " against renewing the power
company's license, and the way seemed clear for the government's
construction of the dam.
Undaunted, however,
the Georgia Power Company secured the support of Representative George
A. Dondero of Michigan, chairman of the House Committee on Public
Works. Congressman Dondero introduced a bill that would have
authorized and directed the Federal Power Commission “to grant a
license to the Savannah River Electric Company to construct, own,
operate, and maintain the powerhouse of the Clark Hill Reservoir
Project.”22 This would have allied the power company with
the Corps of Engineers. The Engineers would build the dam and
reservoir, and the power company would be responsible for the
powerhouse. The bill subsequently was defeated, but the debate
continued for almost two years. In January 1949 the Georgia Power
Company finally announced that it would no longer fight for control of
the power produced by the Clark Hill and other river basin projects.23
The Corps of
Engineers also encountered some difficulty in acquiring the necessary
land for the reservoir basin as power companies challenged the
Government's condemnation procedures. In December 1946 the Savannah
River Electric Company lost a court case when a Federal judge ordered
that 1,532 acres of company land be turned over to the Government for
Federal development of the project.24 In March 1947 this
court order was challenged in U.S. District Court in Atlanta. The
company claimed that the December order was unconstitutional because
the action had been taken before any condemnation papers had been
served. Company officials also argued that the land in question was
part of a much larger tract that had a value for hydroelectric
development of more than $2 million, and that Federal possession of
the land at the dam site would destroy the value of the entire tract.25
Eventually, this conflict was settled in favor of the Corps of
Engineers, and the entire 164,OOO-acre area was acquired.
Top
of Page
Another controversy
arose over the Corps policy related to basin clearing. The original
plan was that all vegetation below the full 330-foot power pool would
be cut, stacked, and burned. After the first contracts went out for
bids, however, the Engineers developed a policy of “selective
clearing”. This modified policy, adopted to save time and money, was
applied to similar projects nationwide.26 Residents of the
Savannah River Basin area, however, cited the possibility of an
outbreak of malaria and expressed concern about the deterioration of
the recreational value of the lake. As a result of this local
opposition to the new policy, the clearing procedure was changed again
to provide for total clearing of timber in the fluctuating water zone
and topping of trees several feet below water level in the minimum
water pool.27 Archaeological explorations and the
relocation of people, cemeteries, and roads were other problems that
had to be solved before water could be impounded in the basin behind
the completed dam. These were dealt with simultaneously with the
construction of the dam.
In addition to
providing power benefits, the Clark Hill project was designed to
reduce floods on the Savannah River and to increase depths for
navigation in the river below Augusta. The regulated flow from Clark
Hill Lake substantially benefits the authorized 9-foot navigation
channel on the river below Augusta by reducing the cost of both
construction and maintenance and by reducing the sediment carried into
Savannah Harbor by as much as 22 percent.28
The
Clark Hill project also is estimated to prevent flood damages in
unleveed areas at and below Augusta of approximately $185,000
annually. For instance, it reduced the height of the March 1964 flood
from 38 feet to 25 feet at Augusta, where the flood stage is 32 feet.29
The 1944 legislation
authorizing the construction of the Clark Hill project also provided
that the Corps of Engineers was empowered “to construct, maintain, and
operate public park and recreational facilities in reservoir areas
under the control of the War Department.”30 For the first
time the Corps was in the business of providing recreation facilities,
and the Clark Hill development involved this new function. In
November 1948 public meetings were held in Lincolnton, Georgia, and in
McCormick, South Carolina, to acquire community input into developing
a recreational plan for the basin.31 At these meetings
Colonel Paschal Strong, Savannah District Engineer, announced that
Corps policy was to work closely with local interests. He further
stated that it was incumbent on state or local governmental agencies
to develop and manage the public parks, subject to the approval of the
Corps of Engineers; that participation by local, state, and other
governmental agencies would determine the number of facilities
provided; and that any plans were subject to final approval, by the
Chief of Engineers. Under these conditions and with considerable local
involvement, an initial plan for recreation and conservation was
developed for Clark Hill. More recently, The Water Resources
Development Act of 1986, Section 864, added recreation and fish and
wildlife management as project purposes for Clarks Hill.32The
first Clark Hill recreation facilities were constructed between 1946
and 1954, coincidental with completion of the dam. The lake, one of
the largest inland bodies of water in the South, has been a popular
site for fishing, boating, camping, picnicking, and other forms of
recreation. Because of the lake's popularity and the public-use
legislation passed during the 1960s and 1970s, the Savannah District
consistently has tried to provide numerous facilities for use by the
general public. By 1989 many of these facilities were nearly 35 years
old and in need of major repair or rehabilitation.32A
program was underway to close and consolidate many of the small,
isolated recreation areas to better use existing funds and manpower.
Several over-used, rundown recreation areas were revamped to provide
some of the finest day-use facilities found in any Corps of Engineers
civil works projects, and by 1989, 37 of the 53 recreation areas on
the lake were operated by the Corps. Public response to these improved
camping sites, picnic sites, shelters, and restroom facilities was
very favorable.33 Sanitary facilities in nine areas, water
and electrical hookups in eight campgrounds, and additional support
facilities such as playgrounds and sanitary fish-cleaning stations
also were planned.34
Top
of Page
Through leasing and licensing, the Corps also provided reservoir lands
for recreational development by club groups, private organizations,
and governmental bodies at city, county, and state levels. This
program is administered by the Corps Natural Resources Manager and is
governed by the Lakeshore Management Plan. As of 1989, the Resource
Manager controlled approximately 1,500 permits/licenses.35
The Lakeshore
Management Plan for Clark Hill Lake was approved in April 1983 and
superseded the interim plan, which had been used since June 1976. The
final plan provided a framework for fulfilling both present and future
demands as well as for assuring maximum benefits to the public. The
permit/licensure program administered under this plan allowed adjacent
property owners to install and use boat docks, walkways, utility
lines, and other minor private facilities.
Two problems emerged in connection with the management
program at Clark Hill. The first related to serious erosion on the
South Carolina shoreline as a result of wave action against the shore
caused by sustained strong westerly winds. Some land had eroded as
much as three feet per year affecting both public and private
property.36 Homeowners, private marinas, and local
businesses asked the Corps of Engineers for assistance in constricting
breakwaters to halt erosion. The primary solution, constructing riprap
along the shoreline cost approximately $100 per linear foot of
shoreline. The District had no authority to spend federal monies to
protect private property, however, and in most cases it was more
economical to purchase the property than to try to stop the erosion.
Property owners generally have opposed this solution.
The other problem
concerned the passage of Public Law 97-140 in 1982. This law hampered
efforts to manage the Lakeshore for the maximum benefit of the public
because many previously authorized private facilities that were
scheduled for phase-out or removal from the public lands were
permitted to remain until January 1990. These facilities included
mobile homes, private roads, docks, and ramps. Public Law 97-140 also
made it difficult to explain to adjacent property owners why they were
denied new permits for these facilities while their neighbors may
maintain them.
In 1980, in addition
to private club and quasi-public facilities, the Clark Hill project
had 70 developed public-use areas.37 Georgia and South
Carolina leased reservoir lands for intensive wildlife management.
These areas provided turkey, deer, quail, dove, duck, and other
small-game hunting in season. The Corps of Engineers also improved the
habitat for deer and turkey on reservoir lands, and provided
protected fields for doves and ponds for ducks. The maintenance of
approximately 125 permanent wildlife food plot areas for quail and
doves was one of the most beneficial and time-consuming activities at
Clark Hill. The District also completed a 20-acre manmade impoundment
near the headwaters of Fishing Creek, Georgia, which can be drained
and planted in the summer and then flooded in winter to provide an
abundant food supply for ducks visiting the area. Bluebirds also
benefit from nesting boxes erected on selected sites in the public
recreation area.38
A wild turkey
restoration project has been established at Bussey Point wilderness
area on the lake. It is a cooperative endeavor of the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, the
National Wild Turkey Federation, the Georgia Wild Turkey Federation,
and 7 private landowners. This 2,500-acre peninsula in Lincoln County,
provided by the Corps, is managed to provide wildlife habitat under a
"National Forest" management concept. The Georgia Department of
Natural Resources, Game Management Division, and the Corps are
responsible for general management of the project with the State
agency responsible for the trapping of excess birds.39
The Bussey Point
area came under some controversy in 1986 when the Chairman of the
Lincoln County (Georgia) Commission suggested that "the Corps has
control of too much property and if there is any they don't need, they
should turn it loose.” He insisted that it would be better for the
citizens of Lincoln County if it [the land] was put on the tax
digest.”40 This suggestion was instigated by the sale
earlier in the year of more that 3,000 acres of Corps land in the
State of South Carolina, which had been declared surplus and was
planned for commercial development. The South Carolina transaction was
the culmination of 15 years of negotiations between the Corps and a
State-created agency concerned with lakeshore development. The long
period of negotiations was necessitated by the reluctance of the Corps
to set just such a precedent, and while the Bussey Point controversy
was short-circuited, the precedent remained.41
In order to enhance
fisheries at the reservoir, the Corps of Engineers worked with state
agencies to minimize annual water-level fluctuation in the spring to
aid in the reproduction of bass and crappies. Also, within the
reservoir proper several "tire unit" fish attractors were sunk, each
consisting of 50 bundles of line tires arranged in a pyramid shape.
The lower tires were filled with concrete to assure that the attractor
was anchored firmly to the bottom of the lake. All attractors were
attached to buoys marking their location. These programs, which were
designed to enhance fish and wildlife populations and to provide the
public with access to them, made Clark Hill one of the most popular of
the reservoirs maintained by the Corps of Engineers. In 1988 more than
6 million people visited Clark Hill, and the lake continued to rank
among the top 10 most popular Corps of Engineers projects in the
nation.42 In December 1987 the congress of the United
States by Joint Resolution designated Clarks Hill Dam, Reservoir, and
Highway atop the Dam as the J. Strom Thurmond Dam, Reservoir, and
Highway. Thereafter, all references to the project carried the new
designation. The name change, which was quickly passed in response to
a resolution introduced by Rep. Butler Derrick (D-S.C.), created
several months of controversy in local news media.
Top
of Page
|
1.
See chapter V, Savannah River at Augusta, for background on
Clark Hill and Hartwell Projects.
2.
Augusta Herald,
17 Feb. 1946.
3.
S. Doc. 66, 76th Cong., 1st sess., pp.2-3
4.
Augusta Herald,
17 Feb. 1946.
5.
H.
Doc. 657, 78th Cong., 2d sess., p. 11.
6.
Ibid., p. 66.
7.
Annual Report,
1946, pp. 764-765; U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Water Resources
Development by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in Georgia
(Atlanta, GS: U.S. Army Engineer Division, Jan. 1973), pp. 40-45.
8.
U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Water Resources Development in
Georgia, 1981, p. 66
9.
U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Engineer Officers Advanced Class
1952, p. 45; Annual Report 1947, pp. 745-746.
10.
U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Engineer Officers Advanced Class,
1952, pp. 45, 48
11. Atlanta
Journal,
12 Dec. 1948; Augusta Chronicle, 7 Dec. 1948; Greenville
News, 30 Jan. 1949. These sources do not indicate whether Neelands
was a civilian or a military engineer.
12. Annual
Report,
1949, p. 726
13. Annual
Report,
1950, pp. 724-725; U.S. Army. Corps of Engineers, Engineer Officers
Advanced Class, 1952, p. 48.
14. U.S.
Army, Corps of Engineers, Engineer Officers Advanced Class,
1952, p. 48.
15. Annual
Report,
1952, p. 544.
16. Annual
Report, 1953, p. 511; Augusta Herald, 5 Jan. 1953.
17. Annual
Report, 1853, p. 511; Annual Report, 1954, P. 343; Annual report,
1955, p. 340.
18. Annual
Report, 1956, p. 450.
19. The
Clark’s Hill Authority of South Caroling, Truth About the Clark’s Hill
Project (1946), Installation Historical Files, Box 1342.
20. Augusta
Herald, 21 Aug. 1946 Augusta Chronicle, 26 Sept. 1946; Savannah
Morning Press, 2 Oct. 1946.
21. Augusta
Herald, 26 Nov. 1946; and 18 Dec. 1946.
22. U.S.
Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Public Works, Clark
Hill Power Project, Georgia and South Carolina: Hearings on H.R.
3826(Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1948), Installation
Historical Giles, Box1342.
23. Augusta
Chronicle, 9 Jan. 1949; Augusta Herald, 12 Jan. 1949.
24. Atlanta
Constitution, 20 Dec. 1946.
25. Augusta
Herald, 27 Mar. 1947.
26. Augusta
Chronicle, 26 Apr. 1950.
27. Hartwell
Sun, 8 Sept. 1950.
28. U.S.
Army, Corps of Engineers, Water Resources Development in Georgia
(1979), P. 69.
29. Ibid.
30. Stats.
At L., 58:329-330
31. U.S.
Army, Corps of Engineers, “Minutes of Public Hearings on Recreation,
Conservation and Publec Use,” Unpublished Document (U.S. Army Engineer
District, 1948); Augusta Herald, 14 Nov. 1948; Augusta Chronicle, 19
Nov. 1948.
32. U.S.
Army, corps of Engineers, Congressional Fact Book (1989)
33. Ibid.
34. Ibid.
35. U.S.
Army, Corps of Engineers, Congressional Fact Book (1989)
36. U.S.
Army, Corps of Engineers, Congressional Fact Book (1984)
37. U.S.
Army, Corps of Engineers, Corps of Engineers Wildlife Management at
Clark Hill Lake (Savannah, GA: U.S. Army Engineer District, Oct.
1976),n.p.
38. U.S.
Army, Corps of Engineers, Water Resources Development in Georgia,
1981, p. 67
39. U.S.
Army, Corps of Engineers, Water Resources Development in Georgia,
1989, p. 61
40. Atlanta
Constitution, 7 Mar. 1986.
41. The
Calhoun Falls News and Times, 29 Jan. 1986.; The Anderson Independent
Mail, 17 June 1986; The Augusta Chronicle, 10 Oct. 1986.
42. U.S.
Army, Corps of Engineers, Water resources Development in Georgia,
1989, p. 61.
Top
of Page
|