Critic Says Bad River Management Causes Flooding
WJ Editorial
Waterways Journal
4 July 2011
There is a wailing and gnashing of teeth throughout the Missouri River
basin about flooding, and along the Lower Mississippi about the lack of
dredging. Today we are going to consider the conclusions of one
observer who believes the 2011 flooding scenario was destined to happen
because of river management policies dictated by environmental
interests.
In his article "The Purposeful Flooding of America's Heartland" on http://www.americanthinker.com,
Joe Herring is not suggesting that the Corps or other government
agencies wanted this flood. Rather, he says that the country has been
misguided since the birth of the Environmental Protection Agency and
environmental protection laws. When the Flood Control Act of 1944 was
passed, it authorized the construction of six main stem Missouri River
dams and reservoirs, designed first and foremost to help prevent
flooding. But, over time, the environmental movement has fought to
redirect the purpose of those dams in order to put flood control later
in the pecking list and advance wildlife and recreation.
It was reported by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on June 23, "...Sen. Roy
Blunt (R-Mo.) said today that as flooding worsens along the river, he
is rounding up support in the basin for a new effort that would
emphasize flood control (first) and navigation (second) as Army
engineers' primary management task."
The necessity for Blunt's effort, aside from the present flood, is that
stakeholders on the upper Missouri, along with environmentalists, have
worked for years to have the water management procedures and priorities
of the Corps examined and shuffled to prioritize wildlife and
recreation. Ultimately a multimillion-dollar study was authorized to
examine those priorities.
These efforts for change hijacked the purpose of the Act. As Herring
explains, "Some 60 years ago, the (Corps) began the process of taming
the Missouri by constructing a series of six dams.
The idea was simple: massive dams at the top moderating flow to the
smaller dams below, generating electricity while providing desperately
needed control of the river's devastating floods.
"The stable flow of water allowed for the construction of the concrete
and earthen levees that protect more than 10 million people who reside
and work within the river's reach. It allowed millions of acres of
floodplain to become useful for farming and development. In fact, these
uses were encouraged by our government, which took credit for the
resulting economic boom. By nearly all measures, the project was a
great success."
Herring adds, "...after about 30 years of operation, as the
environmentalist movement gained strength throughout the '70s and '80s,
the Corps received a great deal of pressure to include some specific
environmental concerns into their MWCM (Master Water Control Manual,
the `bible' for the operation of the darn system)."
The bottom line, according to Herring, is that politicians eagerly
traded their common sense for `green' political support.
Then the environmentalists wanted to restore the river back to its
pre-dam self. After they enlisted the aid of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service to provide an updated biological opinion that would make
ecosystem restoration an "authorized purpose," the Clinton
administration supported the effort, thus shifting officially the
priorities of the Missouri River dam system.
What it boils down to, and Herring documents his conclusions, is that
the Corps, et al., were warned well in advance that they had failed to
evacuate enough water from the main stem reservoirs to meet normal
runoff conditions.
"This year's runoff will be anything but normal," e-mailed Brad
Lawrence, director of public works in Ft. Pierre, S.D. In his e-mail to
the headquarters of the American Water Works Association in Washington,
D.C., Lawrence described the consequences of the Corps' failure to act
as a "flood of biblical proportions." His e-mails were forwarded, said
Herring, from Washington to state emergency response coordinators
nationwide. Corps officials in Omaha, Neb., deny receiving such a
warning, Herring said.
The end result, according to Herring, is that this year's flood is
"many orders of magnitude greater" than the flood of 1993, when 1,000
levees failed. Current published Corps statistics related to flooding
appear to support his contention. By switching horses in the middle of
the stream, the Corps has "needlessly imperiled the property,
businesses, and lives of millions of people." Herring believes the
action constitutes "criminal negligence." He said the evidence of their
mismanagement is clear, "and the possibility that there is specific
intent behind their failure to act must be investigated without delay."
For years we have witnessed the abusive use of environmental law to
hobble progress. Remember the snail darter? Remember the Houston toad?
Remember the furbish lousewort? All represented unreasonable roadblocks
to progress.
The final chapter of the book on the 2011 flood is months, perhaps
years, away from completion, but the Corps statistics are unfolding
now. The ongoing efforts to emphasize environmental goals at the
expense of flood control have long been known. Now we wait for the
results.