Jim DeMint /Sumter National Forest

[Red]

I read this last night in the paper and was wondering what ya'll thought. It sounds like someone is going to get might rich if this happens and have lake front property as well. I never saw a reason or use of this proposed lake. I'm sure it would be another jet ski hole.

www.scwf.org/articles/index.php?view=346

[LabLuvR]

A couple of people are pushing this to fatten their wallets. Aside from that, this is about the stupidest idea I have heard in a while. Maybe even worse than the bridge at Lone Star.

[Chap]

Sportsmen should be very concerned about this lake proposal. The Central Piedmont Wildlife Management Area (WMA) Hunt Units would suffer significant habitat loss and the Tyger River Waterfowl Area would be destroyed. It is no secret that in the past 25 years, the WMA program has lost approximately 500,000 acres - at that rate, there will be no land for public hunting by 2054.

[smcgee]

Yeah, ya'll tell me why WMA has lost so much land, in your opinion. I've been thinking that for years but I've always been too lazy or busy to do any research. I've only hunted 1 particular area steady since I was a kid (Sumter Nat'l down around 178/25 south and private land in the area)and I thought the WMA's were just moving elsewhere and not shrinking. I just thought I might be crazy.

[LabLuvR]

Be sure you are talking about the same thing. WMA's have definately declined when you consider private land once made up a large portion. However, US Forest Land that was/are part of a WMA have not declined to my knowledge, at least in the counties I hunt on occasion. Bottom line is that yes we have lost a lot of private land WMA, but almost zero federal land WMA, at least in the Upstate.

If anyone has experienced losses of federal WMA land I would be curious what happened and where.

[Candor]

Several years ago I met with the Union County Economic Development folks and discussed this issue. We were interested in trying to develop a combined cycle power generation facility on such a lake but the lake was too far out and a few other factors didn't justify further interest from us. However the notion of a lake is not as far fetched as some of you may immediatly conclude. A lake does draw tourists...both the jet ski type and the fishing type. I do not fault their logic in pursuing this. I have not seen the economic studies but would imagine that is where the proof would or would not be.

I am not in favor of it (nor against it)...as their is simply too much left unknown to me at this point.

Would your interest in this project change if you were to find out they are considering a 125 acre partially planted WRP impoundment and a 180 acre green tree reservoir?

[Chap]

Union County has been hit hard with the decline in textiles in our state, along with other negative economic factors. A lake like that would spawn housing along the lake, which in turn creates jobs in construction and feeds the local economy from the bank to the carpenter level. This is but one example. If they are given the chance, and since the County has around a 14% unemployment rate right now, I don't know how they can refuse to implement a plan that can bring jobs to the area.

They have mouths to feed and can't be too choosy about how they get it done.

[LabLuvR]

Well, if they think they got it bad now, wait till they get what they think they want. Higher taxes, more robberies, more drugs, more gangs, more traffic congestion. Been there done that. The rural lifestyle has it's disadvantages that's for sure. But don't be fooled by the lure of progress. Sometime it can be just the opposite.

[AJTiger]

Economic benefits of the lake are very short-sighted. We would not only lose a lot of wma and recreational land, there would be a large loss of river bottomland. If the rate of population expansion and development of this state continues as is, river corridors are going to become very important to the future of our natural resources.

Economic benefits would not be nearly what is probably being suggested. A lake in that area would not have the build up of a lake hartwell. It would be more like Lake Russel or Clarks-Hill. Being surrounded by SNF, there would be little development except at the current private inholdings and along the waterfront where the inholdings lost to the lake will be reimbursed.

Russel and Clarks-Hill have not had a significant inmpact on adjoining counties that I can see. A few bait shops, campgrounds, and boat repair shops don't justify the loss of protected acreage.

Union County residents that are scratching out a living due to textile closings should not be fooled that they will suddenly be able to build a two story brick addition to the manufactured home.

A few people will make a some money on it, but it won't be Joe Schmoe in Cross Keys or Carlisle that will see any of it.

I'd have to agree with Lab. Careful what you wish for. That nice rural way of life will go away and all you get out of it is to fatten the wallet of a couple of people other than yourself.

[Chap]

Don't get me wrong, it's not what I'm wishing for. I hunt in Union County a lot. I would hate to see it happen just like y'all.

[Red]

I just think its a stupid ass idea. What else does DeMint have up his sleeve???