Does Navigation Mean More Water for the Big River?

A lot of people assume that if the Corps of Engineers restores navigation on the Apalachicola River, we will automatically see increased flows in the Apalachicola. In some places, it’s an article of faith. In fact, earlier this week, I heard someone say they support dredging because it will mean more water for the Bay.

Obviously, dredging doesn’t create water. It doesn’t change weather patterns. And, more significantly, it doesn’t necessarily cause the Corps to adjust its ACF Water Control Manual. The Manual controls how much water the reservoirs release. If the Manual stays the same, the flows stay the same.

Dredging can shift sand, reshape the channel, and address some historic damage, but it cannot produce more water.

That does not mean navigation is pointless. In fact, it might be one of the only opportunities we have to address some of the Corps’ past mistakes if we stay engaged and insist on a plan that takes Florida’s needs seriously.

The Corps’ old dredging practices created many of the problems we are dealing with today. They placed spoil directly on the floodplain, blocked sloughs, overcut certain reaches, and altered the river’s natural sediment balance. Those decisions starved the floodplain, buried fish habitat, and pushed sand into the channel. If navigation is restored using those same outdated methods, the river will suffer.

But if modern methods are used, the opposite can happen. Sand can be removed from the channel without dumping it on the floodplain. Sloughs can be protected. The river’s natural function can begin to recover. For the first time in decades, the Corps could help repair the damage it caused.

The bigger opportunity lies in timing. Even if total flows do not increase, responsible navigation could help us get water when we need it most. Raise your hand if you’re frustrated with the “tidal waves” that make the river jump up quickly and then fall out just as fast. That doesn’t help the floodplain or the Bay.

At left are the river stages from January of 2025 to present. Even allowing for the compressed nature of the chart, it’s clear that the Corps has room to improve on the timing of its upstream water releases. But that means listening to those of us downstream who live with the consequences of their actions.

The natural rhythm of the river is steadier, with better timed flows for the creeks and sloughs, the tupelo stands, the oysters, and all its other gifts. The Corps could help everyone by emulating this natural pattern and timing navigational releases accordingly. They could keep sloughs connected longer. They could support oysters and juvenile fish. They could provide the salinity balance the Bay needs to function.

But none of this happens automatically. Navigation only becomes a tool for better water management if we make it one.

To get there, two things must happen.

First, we have to show exactly how much water the ecosystem needs and when it needs it. That means having clear, science based targets that define what the river, floodplain, and Bay require throughout the year. That’s a challenge that the Riparian Counties Stakeholder Coalition (RCSC) is helping to coordinate.

Second, we have to build support upstream for coordinating the timing of releases. This cannot be a Florida only plan. If Georgia and Alabama do not see a benefit, nothing will change. But if responsible navigation requires steadier flows and that steadiness also helps the ecosystem, then we have a shared goal and a real reason to cooperate.

Navigation does not automatically bring more water. But with the right plan, it can bring better water and a real chance to repair harm that has gone unaddressed for far too long.

It is up to us to make sure the Corps gets it right.