My Response

As was to be expected, the river articles that I've published on this site have resulted in the usual backlash from a local blog and a "community social networking forum." Although the latter is nothing more than a well-known cesspool of rumor, lies and crudity, I would have thought that the former would refrain from branding people as "Chicken Littles" and making assumptions such as:
"Before they even talked to Miocene Holdings, before they have talked to any experts, before they researched the science behind this, they began to wage a war of misinformation, half-truths on blogs and with-in (sic) their own spheres of influence."

While I have not had the opportunity to meet with representatives from Miocene, I have certainly been among the many who are studying all available documents, information, letters, emails, minutes etc. I (and others) have also, on an ongoing basis, been conferring with experts: SELC, the GWC, the GaRN, the GaWF, the EPD, UGA and others who are closely examining Miocene Holdings' proposal.
Thus far Miocene is either unwilling or unable to provide information regarding the operations "in Europe" that utilize the same tannin-extraction process (calling it "a trade secret"). Nor have they been able to furnish the EPD with viable information regarding the proposed project - according to the experts at various agencies, Miocene's analysis of the drainage area, low-flow calculations, methodology, potential low-flow pumping cutoff benchmarks etc. is inaccurate.

A local blog then went on to say "The writer tells folks to watch the end where the videographer mentions the river at one point is only inches deep. This gives most uninformed people the impression that the river is in peril and should be left alone because the volume of water is so low. If you watch the video you will hear that the videographer tell us it is “LOW TIDE” and with the lack of rain the river is unnaturally low."
I merely stated that the video is "interesting." Certainly low tides and times of drought are events that occur periodically - but they must be taken into consideration when examining any project that affects the river.

Apparently there are those who consider the St. Marys River Management Committee and others as alarmists - "Chicken Littles". (See SMRMC Chair Chip Campbell's letter to the EPD below, urging that body to deny Miocene's permit for this project). Blogs, editorials and online forums aside, I maintain that until Miocene provides accurate, detailed and verifiable proof that their undertaking will cause no harm to the river, we are best to err heavily on the side of caution. Fortunately the agencies involved agree.