The tenor of Gerrit Jöbsis' column of March 20 ("Dam's removal would benefit river immensely") would lead one to believe that the author, in actuality, knew very little about this stretch of the Savannah River.
We who have been living on this river for more than 25 years appreciate its beauty every day, and are deeply concerned for its health and its future. We sometimes imagine how it looked when Native Americans crossed over the rocks of the fall line, but with the full knowledge that we no longer live in that time. Changes occur.
In 2000, the same argument as the one posed by the guest column led to the simulation of the disabling of the New Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam by conducting a test drawdown.
As a result, instead of a river, we saw a long mud flat stretching from the fall line and down past the Riverwalk. Yes, a mud flat and ugly debris.
Did Gerrit Jöbsis see this? If so, did he believe such a sight would enhance our environment? Does he believe such a sight will reap economic benefits as he predicts will occur with dam removal? I sense in his argument a one-size-fits-all blueprint from his national organization rather than a researched consideration of Augusta's situation.
Nature conservation is an important and worthy goal, but one that must take into account the human situation as well. Everyone in Augusta and North Augusta should "Save Our Savannah" again, as we did in 2000.