Click here for original link
by Randy Dockendorf
blogmaster's note - This meeting was one of a series of public comment meetings about the Draft Scoping Summary of the Missouri River Authorized Purposes Study (MRAPS). Check out MRAPS website here: http://mraps.org/ . You can download the draft summary by clicking here.
Remaining meetings:
| Apr 4 | Nebraska City, NE | Lied Lodge Conference Center, 2700 Sylvan Rd. | |||
| Apr 5 | Kansas City, KS | Hilton Garden Inn, 520 Minnesota Ave. | |||
| Apr 6 | St. Louis, MO | Doubletree Hotel St. Louis at Westport, 1973 Craigshire Rd. |
SIOUX CITY, Iowa — Bill Smith questions the current priorities for the millions of dollars spent each year on operating the Missouri River.
“The Corps of Engineers receives $6.5 million annually to manage the river for us, and then you multiply it by 67 years (since passage of the 1944 Flood Control Act),” the Sioux City man said.
Smith thinks upstream states could gain much greater attention — and resources — with the Missouri River Authorized Purposes Study (MRAPS) under way. Congress directed the Corps of Engineers to conduct the study of Missouri River usage.
However, Smith — the president of the Missouri Valley Waterfowlers Association — sees navigation interests and other parties fighting to block any changes in the river’s uses.
Smith pressed for the study during this week’s MRAPS public feedback meeting in Sioux City. He blasted those who are fighting a change of river priorities or blocking the discovery of new priorities altogether.
“They just want to protect the status quo. They don’t want the study to reveal anything new,” he said. “Special entities are keeping this low key. If the public knew more information, they would come unglued.”
MRAPS marks the first review of the authorized river uses since passage of the 1944 Flood Control Act. The study will determine if changes to those purposes are warranted.
The eight originally authorized purposes are flood control, hydropower, water supply, irrigation, navigation, recreation, water quality, and fish and wildlife. Infrastructure operated by both the Corps and the Bureau of Reclamation is included in the study.
A lot has changed since the eight purposes were established, Smith said.
He pointed to the need to prioritize recreation as a river use, particularly for South Dakota which he said realizes $200 million annually from recreation in the Missouri River basin.
“Iowa, Nebraska and other states would love to have a $200 million economic engine like that,” he said.
Even states drawing fewer recreation dollars still see it as a much greater impact than provided by the navigation industry, Smith said. Railroads and other transportation sources are better used than barges, he said.
“We have fishing and wildlife at stake. We need to put it above navigation in terms of its impact on the region,” he said. “Some past studies since 1977 have shown the navigation industry has been in a steady decline. Yet we continue with the same priorities that we have for the past 67 years.”
Navigation continues as a high priority on river usage despite its declining use, Smith said.
“We are supporting an industry (navigation) that never materialized. We are subsidizing a failed industry,” he said. “We have been trying hard to keep the river managed as a ditch.”
The policies also create problems for power plants, which affects electric costs, Smith said. “All because they need to maintain a channel for navigation purposes,” he said.
Even with recognition of reduced barge tonnage, the current navigation figures are still misleading, said Howard Paul of Canton, technical coordinator for the Missouri Sedimentation Action Coalition (MSAC).
“We are looking at 10 million tons a year for navigation and barge traffic, and 9 million of it is for sand and gravel that is hauled off shore,” he said.
Even navigation supporters at one meeting were not making the Missouri River a priority, Paul said.
“During an MRAPS meeting in Worthington, Minn., last fall, people were talking not about navigation on the Missouri River but on the need for a flow below St. Louis, Mo., to maintain navigation on the Mississippi River,” he said.
MSAC doesn’t comment on the Corps’ annual operating plan (AOP) or its authorized purposes, Paul said. However, MSAC — which held its annual meeting last week in Niobrara, Neb. — does push for greater priority on sediment, he said.
“As sediment accumulates in the reservoirs, it uses up space which could be used to store water,” he said. “That means that space is lost to store water to be used in a beneficial manner.”
Each year, the reservoirs accumulate 89,700 acre-feet of sediment, according to the Corps’ AOP, Paul said. That means a total storage loss of 5,139,200 acre-feet to sediment since the dams went into operation. That is enough loss to store the water from a flood 100 miles long, 10 miles wide with an average depth of 8 feet.
“As each dam fills with sediment, that lost space is volume that could be used for supplying water to domestic water systems,” he said.
Each acre-foot of water serves about nine people with 100 gallons of water per person per day for an entire year, Paul said. At 89,700 acre-feet of sediment accumulation each year, the amount of water storage lost could provide that 100 gallons per person per day for an entire year for 801,918 people.
Lewis and Clark Lake loses 2,600 acre-feet per year to sediment, Paul said. That would provide the water supply to 23,244 people each year. The loss is cumulative, he said, meaning a lost supply for 46,488 people during the second year and so on.
“The world is fast running short of potable water. Big business will get its hands on it and control it. Water supplies are now commonly piped hundreds of miles,” Paul said. “We cannot ignore this loss of storage. We must act now to even begin to stop this lost storage. We cannot afford to take another 50 years to act.”
Sediment wasn’t the only concern raised at the Sioux City meeting. Increasing erosion was cited by Jim Peterson of Vermillion, representing the Missouri River Bank Stabilization Association.
The bank erosion has become particularly acute below Gavins Point Dam, Peterson said. He cited current river use practices and the actions taken by federal agencies. Other priorities outweigh bank stabilization, he said.
The Sioux City meeting marked the fourth in a series of seven scheduled meetings in the Missouri River basin, said Mark Harberg, MRAPS project manager for the Corps’ Omaha District.
The Corps also met this week with the Yankton Sioux Tribe and the White Swan community, Harberg said. The tribes, as sovereign nations, represent an important part of the MRAPS process, he said.
The tribes were represented on the committee determining the scope of the MRAPS study, Harberg said. Tribal members are now learning more about the summary report, he said.
The tribes have been supportive of the MRAPS study and of being included in the process, said Cathy Warren, a Native American consultation specialist for the Corps’ Omaha District.
“We have 29 different tribes, each with different issues and concerns,” she said. “This has been a good opportunity for them to hear the presentation.”
However, MRAPS’ future could end quickly, as the process currently operates on financial life support.
Congress has authorized $25 million for the five-year study, and the Corps has received $7.3 million so far, Harberg said. The project has received no funding during fiscal year 2011, and the Corps has used some remaining funds to keep MRAPS going, he said.
The current continuing resolution for operating the government runs out next week. If additional funding is not received, the MRAPS process will become dormant, Corps officials said.
Despite such uncertainty, Smith said he believes the MRAPS study will continue. The timeline may be extended to seven years given the funding issues, he said.
“I am optimistic that the remaining funding will be found for MRAPS,” he said. “The (remaining) $17 million may be scaled back, but they will continue the process of information gathering, detection and analysis. It’s beneficial for the process to go forward.”
The stakes are too high for the process to fail, Smith said.
“I want to see the dollars invested in the best way, not fruitlessly wasted on policies set 67 years ago,” he said. “I hope everyone contacts their senators and congressmen about this.”
Feedback on the process may be submitted online through April 30 at http://www.mraps.org.
No comments:
Post a Comment