Suwannee-Satilla Regional Water Plan (2011)
Historical edition. This independent guide describes the September 2011 plan. It is not an official state publication or a statement of current requirements.
The Suwannee-Satilla plan is a historical resource for understanding groundwater-dependent communities, agricultural demand and river systems that cross or form the Georgia-Florida boundary. It explains why apparently adequate regional aquifer resources can coexist with seasonal surface-water concerns and receiving-water quality constraints.
Document at a glance
| Item | Details |
|---|---|
| Document | Suwannee-Satilla Regional Water Plan |
| Edition | September 2011; adopted-plan file recovered from the former water-planning website |
| Responsible council | Suwannee-Satilla Regional Water Planning Council |
| Length | 155 PDF pages, including front matter |
| Planning horizon | 2050 |
| Historical filename | SSA_Adopted_RWP_000.pdf |
Area and planning context
The edition covers 18 counties in southern Georgia. Its resource discussion includes the Suwannee, Satilla, St. Marys, Alapaha and Withlacoochee rivers and the Upper Floridan aquifer. The Suwannee headwaters in the Okefenokee area and the distinctive characteristics of blackwater rivers help explain the environmental setting used by the plan.
What makes this edition useful
The historical assessment anticipated that groundwater would provide most of the region's supply, while noting that localized pumping concentrations could still create problems. It identified modeled surface-flow concerns at several planning nodes associated with the Satilla, Suwannee, Alapaha and Withlacoochee systems. These results are presented alongside treatment and dissolved-oxygen questions, rather than as a claim that the entire region lacked water.
The discussion above is based on the plan's executive summary. Read the archived source.
What the document contains
A groundwater-dependent water-use mix
The source inventory separates aquifer use from surface withdrawals and identifies the importance of agriculture. This is useful for understanding why a change in irrigation assumptions can affect the overall planning result.
Basin and node comparisons
The future-needs analysis looks beyond a single regional total to named assessment locations. Its discussion of seasonal flows and dry-year conditions helps readers interpret the circumstances in which modeled concerns arise.
Blackwater systems and discharge quality
The resource chapters describe ecological conditions and the quality assessment, including dissolved oxygen and treatment considerations. The plan also discusses municipal and industrial discharge, land application and onsite sewage systems.
A phased management response
The selected practices and implementation chapters connect conservation, better information, potential supply measures, treatment improvements and nonpoint-source management with delivery responsibilities and benchmarks.
What you can use it for
- Georgia-Florida watershed studies. Locate the regional planning context for rivers that continue into Florida or form the state boundary.
- Irrigation and aquifer research. Compare the original groundwater assumptions with the separate findings for seasonal surface flows.
- Environmental reporting. Find the historical basis for discussing blackwater river conditions, treatment needs and the difference between local and regional resource findings.
These are suggested research uses of the document, not claims that the council produced it for each of these specific audiences.
A practical reading route
- Start with the executive summary. PDF pages 15, 18, 20, 21, 22 contain the region-specific context and findings used in this guide. PDF page numbers include covers and may differ from the printed labels.
- Use the resource inventory and forecasting chapters to identify the source, user sector, baseline and scenario behind the issue you are studying.
- Follow the capacity comparison into the selected management practices. Read the implementation material before describing a proposal as a commitment, a funded project or a completed intervention.
- Consult the bibliography and referenced technical studies for modeling methods and supporting assumptions. A referenced study or supplementary memorandum is not necessarily included in the main PDF.
Useful questions to take into the source:
- Which river node or aquifer setting does the finding concern?
- How do annual-average demand and dry-season conditions differ?
- Does the action address water quantity, receiving-water quality or an information gap?
How to interpret the historical findings
A favorable regional aquifer assessment does not establish that any particular well location or pumping rate is acceptable. Equally, a modeled concern at a river node should not be generalized to every municipality in the region.
Keep observations, forecasts and recommendations separate. A projection for 2050 records what the 2011 planning exercise expected under its assumptions; it does not establish what has happened since. For present-day decisions, check the applicable later plan, source studies and agency guidance.
Read or obtain the original
- Internet Archive: view the September 2011 PDF.
- Internet Archive: open the archived PDF directly. This is the external archived copy, not a PDF hosted by this independent site.
- EPD: official regional plan catalog. For current planning, use this official catalog; its newer editions are separate documents.
- If an older copy is unavailable, ask Georgia EPD at water.planning@dnr.ga.gov for the September 2011 edition.
The archived PDF was retrieved and opened successfully on 31 October 2026. External archives may later change their availability.
May 2011 consultation version
An earlier consultation-stage file was also recovered: WPB201105SSARWP.pdf (155 PDF pages). It is a different edition from the September plan described above. This guide does not assert that the draft and adopted recommendations are identical.
Open the May 2011 consultation-stage PDF in the Internet Archive. Use this version if you are following a citation to the initial recommendations or studying the consultation process. Compare the two originals before attributing a change to the public-review period.
Related document guides
About this guide
This page is an original editorial description and reading guide. It does not reproduce the report's text, tables, maps or photographs. The document title identifies the source; links lead to third-party repositories or the official planning program. This website is independently operated and is not affiliated with Georgia EPD or the regional council.