For Immediate Release Wednesday, October 2, 2002 Contact: Chad Smith, 402-477-7910 Eric Eckl, 202-347-7550 ext.3023 Fish and Wildlife Service caves to Army Corps pressure on Missouri River (Lincoln, NE) Citing drought conditions - but in fact acting to evade an unwelcome legal requirement - the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers secured the blessing of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service yesterday to once again defer adopting long overdue revisions to the operating regime for its Missouri River dams. In a letter to the Army Corps dated October 1, Service officials backed off their previous requirement that the Corps make changes to its river management beginning in the spring of 2003. In their letter, Fish and Wildlife Service concurred with the Corps that foreseeable drought conditions in the basin next year would preclude higher spring flows on the river to build sandbars and provide a reproductive trigger for fish. The conservation community accepts this assessment, noting that Service's "Biological Opinion" did not ask for increased springtime flows during years of drought or flood. However, river advocates pointed out that the Service appears to have also given the Corps a pass on the requirement to reduce flows next summer - a step required each year regardless of rainfall levels. Drought is merely the Army Corps' latest rationale to stall delivery of its new "Master Manual" guiding dam operations. Ecologically and economically straightforward, revisions have been mired by political controversy for eleven years due to fierce opposition from downstream shipping and agribusiness interests. "Does the Army Corps want us to believe that they need rain to put ink in their printer cartridges to finalize the operations plan?," asked Chad Smith, Director of American Rivers' Nebraska Field Office. "The Fish and Wildlife Service had not asked for a spring rise under drought conditions anyway." In its September 27 letter to the Fish and Wildlife Service requesting an extension, the Corps continued its campaign to discredit the scientific underpinnings of the new dam operation requirements, asserting that reproduction of two threatened and endangered birds on the river, the piping plover and the interior least tern, had been strong over the past five years. However, this success is due to a period of high river flows in 1997 - conditions the Fish and Wildlife Service has asked the Corps to re-create to some degree through revised dam operations. Since that time, reproductive success of the birds has tapered off without subsequent spring rises to rebuild the sandbars and scour vegetation. Defenders of the status quo have asserted that low summer flows on the Missouri could threaten city water supplies, reduce power plant capacity, and halt river navigation entirely. But none of these predictions materialized this summer, despite conditions that kept water levels low in a manner similar to that requested by the Fish and Wildlife Service. "This summer, with low flows on the river, everyone had drinking water, no power plants shut down, there were no power outages, and now barges are back on the river moving grain this fall," said Smith. "Plus, people got out and enjoyed the river in droves because of the lower water levels." In its letter, the Corps made no mention of the pallid sturgeon, the most endangered species on the Missouri River. Young sturgeon and other native fish depend on slow, shallow water in the summer months for survival, but find little such habitat on the lower river today as water levels are kept artificially high to support a nearly nonexistent barge industry. "What about the fish?" asked Smith. "The Corps not only fails to note why the birds are actually reproducing, it also conveniently ignores the fact that native fish like the pallid sturgeon are still struggling to stay alive on the Missouri." The Corps' continued resistance to new operations for its Missouri River dams is contrary to sound science and economics, public opinion, and the law: * The science is solid. Two years of study went into a January 2002 report on the Missouri River from the National Academy of Sciences. The report concluded that "degradation of the Missouri River ecosystem will continue unless the river's natural water flow is significantly restored." In addition, natural resource professionals working for all of the states along the river concur with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's water flow recommendations. * The economy would benefit. The Science Academy concluded that Missouri River dam reforms will "enhance the valuable fishery resources...increase waterfowl populations...increase the abundance of largemouth bass...attract more anglers to the region...and result in marked increases in user-days for recreational fishing, commercial fishing, and hunting" and therefore may be "justifiable solely on the grounds that it represents an economic improvement" over current dam operations. Already, these activities amount to an $87 million industry each year in South Dakota alone. In contrast, the barge industry has dwindled to less than $7 million annually among four states. * The public supports change. Out of 55,000 comments submitted to the Corps during a public comment period on dam operations that ended February 28, over 54,000 supported the restoration of more natural flows to the Missouri. Since January, at least eight Missouri River basin newspapers have editorialized numerous times in favor of restoring more natural flows to the Missouri. Six of the eight governors in the Missouri River basin have formally recommended experimenting with flow changes to restore the river. * The law is clear. The Corps has been on notice since 1990 that its current plan jeopardizes the continued existence of at least three native river species. By attempting to pressure the Fish and Wildlife Service into withdrawing or modifying its requirements, the Army Corps is setting the stage for management of the Missouri River to be decided in court. This action undermines the fair and consistent implementation of the Endangered Species Act, a cornerstone of U.S. environmental protection for 30 years. "Without new scientific information, Interior has no justification for letting the Corps off the hook on low flows next summer," Smith warned. "We're running out of faith that the agencies have the will to manage the Missouri River like it's 2002 and not 1960, and we'll be reviewing our options for seeking a remedy in court." For more information, point your browser to http://www.savethemissouri.org/ Erin E. Jordahl Director, Iowa Chapter Sierra Club 3839 Merle Hay Road, Suite 280 Des Moines, IA 50310 515-277-8868 [log in to unmask] [log in to unmask]