{"title":"没有军队的法庭?美国陆军工程兵团和佛罗里达州诉佐治亚州案","authors":"Frank Schmitz, Tyler McCreary","doi":"10.1353/sgo.2022.0035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>highlights:</p><list list-type=\"bullet\"><list-item><label>•</label><p>The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has altered the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) river system.</p></list-item><list-item><label>•</label><p>Past and current Army Corps projects in the ACF contour legal conflicts between states.</p></list-item><list-item><label>•</label><p><i>Florida v. Georgia</i> invites future geographic engagement with the history and practices of engineers in the ACF.</p></list-item></list><p>This paper examines the role of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) in a recent Supreme Court case, <i>Florida v. Georgia</i>, concerning water allocation in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) river basin. Although several non-federal, run-of-the-river hydropower dams exist on the Chattahoochee and Flint rivers, the system of five federal dams operated by the Corps most profoundly impacts the flow regime of the Chattahoochee and Apalachicola rivers. While the Corps was not a party in <i>Florida v. Georgia</i>, findings throughout the legal proceedings demonstrated the centrality of the Corps to contemporary politics and conflicts in the ACF. We propose the results of <i>Florida v. Georgia</i> can serve as inspiration for geographers studying the ACF river basin and other transboundary rivers to analytically and politically engage with experts and technical knowledge in new ways.</p>","PeriodicalId":45528,"journal":{"name":"Southeastern Geographer","volume":"62 1","pages":"298 - 317"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"To Court Without the Corps? The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Florida v. Georgia\",\"authors\":\"Frank Schmitz, Tyler McCreary\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/sgo.2022.0035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>highlights:</p><list list-type=\\\"bullet\\\"><list-item><label>•</label><p>The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has altered the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) river system.</p></list-item><list-item><label>•</label><p>Past and current Army Corps projects in the ACF contour legal conflicts between states.</p></list-item><list-item><label>•</label><p><i>Florida v. Georgia</i> invites future geographic engagement with the history and practices of engineers in the ACF.</p></list-item></list><p>This paper examines the role of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) in a recent Supreme Court case, <i>Florida v. Georgia</i>, concerning water allocation in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) river basin. Although several non-federal, run-of-the-river hydropower dams exist on the Chattahoochee and Flint rivers, the system of five federal dams operated by the Corps most profoundly impacts the flow regime of the Chattahoochee and Apalachicola rivers. While the Corps was not a party in <i>Florida v. Georgia</i>, findings throughout the legal proceedings demonstrated the centrality of the Corps to contemporary politics and conflicts in the ACF. We propose the results of <i>Florida v. Georgia</i> can serve as inspiration for geographers studying the ACF river basin and other transboundary rivers to analytically and politically engage with experts and technical knowledge in new ways.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45528,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Southeastern Geographer\",\"volume\":\"62 1\",\"pages\":\"298 - 317\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Southeastern Geographer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/sgo.2022.0035\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southeastern Geographer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/sgo.2022.0035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
To Court Without the Corps? The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Florida v. Georgia
highlights:
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has altered the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) river system.
Past and current Army Corps projects in the ACF contour legal conflicts between states.
Florida v. Georgia invites future geographic engagement with the history and practices of engineers in the ACF.
This paper examines the role of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) in a recent Supreme Court case, Florida v. Georgia, concerning water allocation in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) river basin. Although several non-federal, run-of-the-river hydropower dams exist on the Chattahoochee and Flint rivers, the system of five federal dams operated by the Corps most profoundly impacts the flow regime of the Chattahoochee and Apalachicola rivers. While the Corps was not a party in Florida v. Georgia, findings throughout the legal proceedings demonstrated the centrality of the Corps to contemporary politics and conflicts in the ACF. We propose the results of Florida v. Georgia can serve as inspiration for geographers studying the ACF river basin and other transboundary rivers to analytically and politically engage with experts and technical knowledge in new ways.
期刊介绍:
The Southeastern Geographer is a biannual publication of the Southeastern Division of Association of American Geographers. The journal has published the academic work of geographers and other social and physical scientists since 1961. Peer-reviewed articles and essays are published along with book reviews, organization and conference reports, and commentaries. The journal welcomes manuscripts on any geographical subject as long as it reflects sound scholarship and contains significant contributions to geographical understanding.