More Details about Flow Control

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is hosting public workshops and public hearings on their proposals for a plan for operating the Missouri's six big dams which control the river's flow. Shortcomings identified during the drought of the late 1980's as well as listings under the Endangered Species Act require another look at the Missouri River Master Water Control Manual.

Today, seasonal fluctuations on the river are gone, replaced by stable flows to support minimal commercial barge traffic. Fish and wildlife, people, and local communities have paid the price. Three native Missouri River species are on the brink of extinction, and many more are in decline. Recreation on the river is also given little priority in management decisions.

As a citizen you have an opportunity to give input in this process, by attending these public meetings and urging the Corps to adopt the recommendation of the Fish and Wildlife Service. This will prevent extinction of Missouri River species, support traditional uses of the river, and provide substantial recreation and tourism dollars for riverside communities.

We are looking for local activists to speak and/or people who will wear badges of support and sit in the audience. Both of these roles are very important.

To learn more about the importance of reforming dam operations on the Missouri River, go to: www.savethemissouri.org You can make a difference on this issue!

Back to Top

WHAT IS BEING DEBATED - THE FLOW CONTROL ALTERNATIVES

These are the six dam operation alternatives identified in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS):

1. Current Water Control Plan (no change)
2. Modified Control Plan (Northwestern Division alternative from January 2000)
3. Biological Opinion #1 (GP1528)
4. Biological Opinion #2 (GP2028)
5. Biological Opinion #3 (GP1521)
6. Biological Opinion #4 (GP2021) *

The last four alternatives are loosely based on the Fish and Wildlife Service's biological opinion. For example, GP 2021 would be a spring rise of up to 20,000 cfs and a low summer flow down to 21,000 cfs out of Gavins Point Dam.

* American Rivers supports the GP2021 out of the six alternatives analyzed by the Corps of Engineers for Missouri River management. Only GP2021 fully encompasses the flow recommendations in the FWS biological opinion. We're calling it the "Flexible Flow alternative" because it gives the Corps flexibility in how it deals with Missouri River flows: the Corps would have the authority to implement a spring rise of up to 20,000 cfs and low summer flows down to 21,000 cfs, but it could pick a different starting point and still work its way toward the 20,000/21,000 levels.

According to the Corps' analysis, the "Flexible Flow alternative" option provides substantial fish and wildlife benefits in comparison to the current water control plan and the other alternatives identified in the RDEIS. And it does not unduly impact other uses of the river like floodplain farming, hydropower, navigation, or flood control.

Thus, American Rivers will recommend to the Corps that they adopt GP2021, the "Flexible Flow alternative," as the preferred alternative in the final EIS next May.

Back to Top

INFORMATION RESOURCES

American Rivers website

American Rivers is launching a new Web site called www.savethemissouri.org to provide information about Missouri River dam operation reforms and to provide an easy way for people to submit comments to the Corps on the Master Manual.

Army Corps of Engineers website

The summary of the new Missouri River Master Manual EIS, the locations and dates of the public hearings, and other information is available at the Army Corps web site:

http://www.nwd-mr.usace.army.mil/mmanual/mast-man.htm

People

American Rivers:
Chad Smith - csmith@amrivers.org
Jamie Mierau - jmierau@amrivers.org

Kansas Sierra Club:
Bill Griffith - bgriff@lvnworth.com, 913-772-8960
Greg Bryant - bryants@rainbowtel.net, 785-544-7735

Back to Top

ACTION ITEMS

• Attend a public hearing
• Come to one or more of the Corps public hearings to show your support for the Fish and Wildlife Service recommendations for Missouri River flow management.
• Provide testimony at the hearing
• Take the extra step of offering your own testimony as to why you want the Missouri River managed for wildlife, recreation, and ecological health. Speak from your own experiences, your own appreciation of the river, and your own knowledge.
• Write a comment for the record to the Corps

Through February 28, 2002, the Corps is accepting public comment on Missouri River management practices. Write in support for giving greater consideration to fish and wildlife, tourism and recreation to:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Northwestern Division
Att: Missouri River Master Manual RDEIS
12565 W Center Rd.
Omaha, NE 68144

or e-mail to mastermanual@usace.army.mil

Write your Representative and Senators

Write a letter to your U.S. Senator and U.S. Representative asking them to support the Army Corps of Engineers giving greater consideration to fish and wildlife, tourism and recreation in their management of the Missouri River.

Back to Top

GOOD BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Fact & Fiction Along the Missouri River

The following examples demonstrate the tactics some organizations and individuals will stoop to in order to scare the public about the consequences of adjusting spring and summer river flows to restore the Missouri River. These and other allegations earned a rebuke from the Omaha World-Herald on September 6, which editorialized, "Critics who plan to oppose this approach [flow changes recommended by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service] will need compelling, fact-based arguments not built from anecdotes, anger and fear."

FLOODING

Fiction: "The potential consequences of increased flooding are prevalent and disastrous." Coalition to Protect the Missouri River, August 20, 2001. Members include the Missouri Farm Bureau, the National Corn Growers Association, MARC 2000, Farmland Industries, and other agricultural and shipping organizations.

Fact: "Overall, impacts to flood control benefits resulting from any of the alternatives are considered insignificant." (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement [RDEIS] Summary, August 31, 2001, Page 14)

FLOODPLAIN AGRICULTURE

Fiction: "Deliberately causing river levels to rise during the spring months threatens nearly 100,000 acres of farmland in Iowa alone and 1.4 million acres in Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas and Missouri." Ed Wiederstein, president, Iowa Farm Bureau, April 16, 2001.

Fact: "Both groundwater and interior drainage impacts would be largely be experienced on lands that are affected by current operations." (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, RDEIS Summary, August 31, 2001, Page 15.)

MISSOURI RIVER NAVIGATION

Fiction: "A spring rise would eliminate the barge industry on the Missouri River." National Corn Growers Association press release, October 9, 2001.

Fact: GP2021, the "Flexible Flow Alternative"*, and all other flow adjustments outlined in the RDEIS Summary of August 31, 2001 would still require the Army Corps to maintain at least full service navigation flows in the spring and then increase flows "back to full navigation service" by September 1st each year. (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, RDEIS Summary, August 31, 2001, Page 11)

*The Flexible Flow Alternative refers to GP2021, the option within the August 31, 2001 RDEIS Summary endorsed by river conservation groups.

MISSISSIPPI RIVER NAVIGATION

Fiction: "A final consequence of [this plan] is the impediment of navigation on the Mississippi River." National Corn Growers Association "fact sheet", 2001.

Fact: According the RDEIS Summary, the Mississippi
River barge industry loses about $45 million per year
in "Lost Navigation Efficiency" due to current Missouri River dam operations. The Flexible Flow alternative would save the industry $7.3 million per year an improvement of over 16%. (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, RDEIS Summary, August 31, 2001, Page 25)

HYDROPOWER GENERATION

Fiction: "The spring rise would decrease power generation and increase utility bills for millions of Americans." National Corn Growers Association press release, October 9, 2001.

Fact: According to the RDEIS Summary, the Flexible Flow Alternative actually generates 2% more hydropower benefits each year than current dam operations. (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, RDEIS Summary, August 31, 2001, Page 16)

SCIENTIFIC BASIS FOR FLOW RECOMMENDATIONS

Fiction: "We have been critical of the Fish and Wildlife Service because we haven't seen the scientific evidence supporting the proposed changes in the flow pattern on the river." Missouri Department of Natural Resources Director Steve Mahfood op-ed, April 13, 2001.

Fact: "The MRNRC* supports the recommendations contained in the [U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service] Biological Opinion as biologically sound and scientifically justified." (Missouri River Natural Resources Committee letter to Interior Secretary Gale Norton, May 21, 2001, Page 1) * The Missouri River Natural Resources Committee (MRNRC) is comprised of state fish and wildlife management agency biologists from Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, and Montana.

SPRING AND SUMMER FLOWS

Fiction: "The spring rise/summer low does not mimic the Missouri River's natural hydrograph, but rather introduces previously unseen new features into the hydrograph." Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon letter to Interior Secretary Gale Norton, August 16, 2001.

Fact: "Elements of the historical hydrograph mimicked by [the recommended flow changes] include higher flows through mid-June and lower flows from mid-July through August." (Missouri River Natural Resources Committee letter to Nebraska Department of Natural Resources Director Roger Patterson, July 31, 2000, Page 1)

Back to Top

A GOOD JOURNALISTIC SUMMARY OF THE ISSUE:

River Report Unleashes Flood of Emotions
THE NATION, September 1, 2001

Water: Army Corps appears to be backing away from a plan to reintroduce the natural flow to the Missouri.
By STEPHANIE SIMON

ST. LOUIS Wheat farmers and bird lovers and barge owners and politicians have been fighting a pitched battle over America's longest river for a good 12 years now. On Friday, the fight got nastier still when the Army Corps of Engineers released a long-awaited report on manipulating the flow of the Missouri River.

The report did not actually contain a recommendation. But that omission in itself was a major statement. And it got all sides spinning furiously.

To sum up the debate: Environmentalists want to restore a seasonal ebb and flow to the Missouri, which has been forced into a narrow channel for decades, by flooding it a bit in the spring and drying it out a bit in the summer in order to give endangered fish and birds better habitat for breeding.

North and South Dakotans like that idea too, because it would keep their reservoirs intact in the summer. They long have resented all the water that spills over their dams to keep the Missouri River artificially high downstream in summer months. Every drop they lose from their reservoirs is a drop they can't use for recreation, such as fishing or boating.

Barge companies, however, insist that the Missouri must be manipulated as it is now, to flow steadily throughout the year. A spring flood and summer ebb, they argue, would wipe out their shipping business altogether. That worries the wheat, corn and soybean farmers, who ship their crops on barges down the Missouri.

In truth, not much grain is shipped this way. But farmers contend that just having barge shipping as an option keeps a lid on railroad fees. Without that competition, they fear, their rail freight costs would soar.

After more than a decade of analysis, the Army Corps of Engineers, which controls six dams along the Missouri, appeared poised late last year to endorse the "spring rise" favored by environmentalists.

But under the new Bush administration, the plan was reevaluated. And the corps on Friday issued an environmental impact statement for Missouri River management that contains no "preferred alternative." Instead of throwing its clout behind the ebb-and-flow plan, as it had once signaled it would, the corps listed that option as one of six open for consideration.

Corps officials insist the option is still viable and say they have not yet made up their mind.

Environmentalists and upstream interests, however, read Friday's report as a death knell for their cherished spring rise.

"We're very disappointed that the corps backed off from offering the scientifically valid [plan] and instead chose to confuse the public," said Mark Beorkrem, a policy analyst for the Sierra Club.

"A huge dose of politics has been stuck right in the middle of the Missouri River management plan," fumed Sen. Byron L. Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat. "This is not a good omen." Barge owners and farmers, on the other hand, were delighted. So was Sen. Christopher S. Bond, a Missouri Republican who has lobbied to keep the Missouri River flowing more or less as is. On Friday, Bond issued a statement applauding the corps' report as a sign that the agency "is not rigged in favor of a dangerous spring rise." He predicted the corps soon would reject that option outright.

Bond and his allies deem the spring rise dangerous because it could flood farms downstream. They point out that, while the corps can control the amount of water it releases from upstream dams, it cannot control rainfall or water levels in the many tributaries that feed the Missouri. So they can all too easily envision catastrophe: The corps tries to create a modest spring flood and ends up drowning thousands of acres of cropland, even river towns.

"All you need is one major bad year and you'll have farmers going out of business and barge companies going out of business," said Chris Brescia, a spokesman for barge interests.

Environmentalists counter that an ebb-and-flow system is vital to saving endangered species such as the pallid sturgeon, the least tern and the piping plover. The fish breed best in the shallow pools created by spring floods. The birds lay their eggs on sandbars in the summer or they would if the river were lower.

"Most of the species on the Missouri River evolved with a spring flood as the trigger for their reproductive process," Beorkrem said.

The debate seems likely to heat up even more as the Army Corps of Engineers holds a series of public meetings later this year all along the Missouri watershed. A final decision is expected next May.

"Maybe there is a way we can address the concerns of all involved," said Dan Cassidy of the Missouri Farm Bureau. "We're hopeful that, ultimately, we'll get there."

Dorgan is not so optimistic. "American history is filled with fights over water. This is nothing new."

Back to Top

Mitigation And Muddling On The Missouri

Recent news on the Missouri River is both encouraging and discouraging. The good news is about the Army Corps of Engineers mitigation process.

Because the Missouri River Bank Stabilization and Navigation Project has impacted fish and wildlife habitat quality, fish and wildlife populations and the opportunities for recreation along the river, Congress authorized the Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Project within the states of Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri. In 1986 48,100 acres of terrestrial and aquatic habitat was authorized which resulted (in Kansas) in the creating of the 2200 acre Benedectine Bottoms area near Atchison. Congress in 1999 authorized an additional 118, 650 acres which represents 1 percent of the bottomland from Sioux City to St. Louis.

The Corps is now taking comments on whether to mitigate the entire acreage and turn it back into aquatic and terrestrial habitat or not mitigate it at this time. If mitigated now the project is projected to last thirty years and is funded yearly by Congress. The Kansas Chapter testified at a hearing in Atchison in favor of full mitigation.

The general criteria for the acquistion and development of sites along the river by the Corps include purchasing from willing sellers, minimum size generally of a hundred acres, no adverse effect on navigation, flood control, or levees, an emphasis on acquiring larger contiguous tracts of bottomland timber, wetlands, and grasslands, acquistion will be confined to the meander belt, sites for chute and backwater restoration will undergo an engineering, economic, and environmental feasibility determination, public access will not be a determining factor, sites chosen for chute, backwater or wetlands restoration will include enough adjacent land to allow establishment of perimeter habitats, sites chosen for acquistion and/or development will be based on State and Federal agency input and support, and estimated operation and maintenance costs will also be considered.

Now to the muddling. The US Fish and Wildlife Service has backed down on forcing the Corps to comply with the Endangered Species Act and is not forcing them to incorporate a spring rise in their management of the river during non-drought years. The Bush Administration has been working hard to ensure that this is a political process and not based on science. Some environmental groups have threatened to sue and it remains to be seen how this will play out. Stay tuned.

Back to Top