[House Hearing, 107 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
H.R. 3480 and H.R. 3606
=======================================================================
LEGISLATIVE HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND POWER
of the
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
March 7, 2002
__________
Serial No. 107-90
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
house
or
Committee address: http://resourcescommittee.house.gov
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
78-048 WASHINGTON : 2002
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah, Chairman
NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia, Ranking Democrat Member
Don Young, Alaska, George Miller, California
Vice Chairman Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts
W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin, Louisiana Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
Jim Saxton, New Jersey Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
Elton Gallegly, California Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee Samoa
Joel Hefley, Colorado Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
Ken Calvert, California Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
Scott McInnis, Colorado Calvin M. Dooley, California
Richard W. Pombo, California Robert A. Underwood, Guam
Barbara Cubin, Wyoming Adam Smith, Washington
George Radanovich, California Donna M. Christensen, Virgin
Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Islands
Carolina Ron Kind, Wisconsin
Mac Thornberry, Texas Jay Inslee, Washington
Chris Cannon, Utah Grace F. Napolitano, California
John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania Tom Udall, New Mexico
Bob Schaffer, Colorado Mark Udall, Colorado
Jim Gibbons, Nevada Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
Mark E. Souder, Indiana James P. McGovern, Massachusetts
Greg Walden, Oregon Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho Hilda L. Solis, California
Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado Brad Carson, Oklahoma
J.D. Hayworth, Arizona Betty McCollum, Minnesota
C.L. ``Butch'' Otter, Idaho
Tom Osborne, Nebraska
Jeff Flake, Arizona
Dennis R. Rehberg, Montana
Tim Stewart, Chief of Staff
Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel/Deputy Chief of Staff
Steven T. Petersen, Deputy Chief Counsel
Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk
James H. Zoia, Democrat Staff Director
Jeffrey P. Petrich, Democrat Chief Counsel
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND POWER
KEN CALVERT, California, Chairman
ADAM SMITH, Washington, Ranking Democrat Member
Richard W. Pombo, California George Miller, California
George Radanovich, California Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
Greg Walden, Oregon, Calvin M. Dooley, California
Vice Chairman Grace F. Napolitano, California
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho James P. McGovern, Massachusetts
J.D. Hayworth, Arizona Hilda L. Solis, California
C.L. ``Butch'' Otter, Idaho Brad Carson, Oklahoma
Tom Osborne, Nebraska
Jeff Flake, Arizona
------
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on March 7, 2002.................................... 1
Statement of Members:
Kind, Hon. Ron, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Wisconsin............................................... 8
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480.......................... 11
Walden, Hon. Greg, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Oregon............................................ 2
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480 and H.R. 3606............ 2
Statement of Witnesses:
Daigle, Doug, Hypoxia Program Director, Mississippi River
Basin Alliance............................................. 28
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480.......................... 30
Hirsch, Dr. Robert M., Associate Director for Water, U.S.
Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior......... 5
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480.......................... 6
Keys, John W. III, Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation, U.S.
Department of the Interior................................. 3
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480.......................... 4
McLachlan, John A., Ph.D., Weatherhead Distinguished
Professor of Environmental Studies, Professor of
Pharmacology, Director, Center for Bioenvironmental
Research, Tulane and Xavier Universities................... 36
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480.......................... 38
McMillen, Morton D., Principal Engineer, Montgomery Watson
Harza...................................................... 17
Prepared statement on H.R. 3606.......................... 19
Schnoor, Jerald L., Ph.D., P.E., DEE, Professor, Civil and
Environmental Engineering, Co-Director, Center for Global
and Regional Environmental Research, The University of Iowa 24
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480.......................... 26
Stoerker, Holly, Executive Director, Upper Mississippi River
Basin Association.......................................... 32
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480.......................... 34
Additional materials supplied:
Foster, The Honorable M.J. ``Mike'', Governor, State of
Louisiana, et al., Letter submitted for the record......... 13
Hulshof, The Honorable Kenny, and The Honorable Leonard
Boswell. Letter submitted for the record on H.R. 3480...... 10
LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 3480, TO PROMOTE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
EFFORTS TO PROVIDE A SCIENTIFIC BASIS FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF SEDIMENT
AND NUTRIENT LOSS IN THE UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN; AND H.R. 3606,
TO AUTHORIZE THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION TO PARTICIPATE IN THE
REHABILITATION OF THE WALLOWA LAKE DAM IN OREGON, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES.
----------
Thursday, March 7, 2002
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Water and Power
Committee on Resources
Washington, DC
----------
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in
room 1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Greg Walden,
presiding.
Mr. Walden. Good morning. We commence the hearing on H.R.
3480, to promote the Department of the Interior efforts to
provide a scientific basis for the management of sediment and
nutrient loss in the Upper Mississippi Basin and H.R. 3606, to
authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to participate in the
rehabilitation of the Wallowa Lake Dam in Oregon, and for other
purposes.
Mr. Walden. Under Rule 4B of the Committee rules, any oral
opening statements at hearings are limited to the Chairman and
the Ranking Minority Member. If other members have statements,
they can be included in the hearing record under unanimous
consent, if any members disagree with that--good.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Walden. The Chairman will recognize the Ranking
Minority Member, Mr. Kind, when he comes to give his opening
statement, but I understand that several of the witnesses are
on pretty tight schedules this morning, so, in concurrence with
the minority staff, we have agreed to proceed, and I will do
that.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. GREG WALDEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OREGON
Mr. Walden. So what I'd like to do now is give a brief
opening statement and submit my full statement for the record.
Today, we hold a legislative hearing on two bills, as I
have mentioned. The first is the Upper Mississippi River Basin
Protection Act of 2001, which provides for the Department of
Interior and U.S. Geological Survey to supplement, coordinate,
and manage data collection on sediments and nutrients in the
Upper Mississippi River Basin and use the data to perform
computer modeling to provide the baseline data and modeling
tools needed to make scientifically sound and cost-effective
management decisions.
The other legislation deals with the issue in Wallowa
County Oregon of the Wallowa Lake Dam, which was built in 1918,
I believe, and it is about 35 feet tall. It was reconstructed
in the 1920's. In 1996, the Wallowa Lake Dam was listed as a
high-hazard structure by the Oregon Water Resources Department
of Dam Safety.
A sudden failure and release of water would most certainly
result in loss of life and property, as well as severe
environmental and economic damage to the communities that lie
downstream. In fact, the dam has been holding water at less
than the maximum authorized pool level since 1970.
So this is one that, clearly, we are trying to find a way
to get some help on, and I know others have been assisting in
that way as well.
In addition, the improvements that they have recommended
here would help both improve water quality, streamflows and
meet other problems in the local area, including trust
obligations to the Nez Perce Tribe.
So I will put my full statement into the record.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Walden follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Greg Walden, Vice Chair, Subcommittee on
Water and Power, on H.R. 3480 and H.R. 3606
Today we will hold a legislative hearing on two bills,
H.R. 3480, the Upper Mississippi River Protection Act of 2001, and
H.R. 3603, the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management
Act of 2001
First, H.R. 3480, the Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act
of 2001, provides for the Department of the Interior, U. S. Geological
Survey to supplement, coordinate and manage data collection on
sediments and nutrients in the Upper Mississippi River Basin and use
the data to perform computer modeling to provide the baseline data and
modeling tools needed to make scientifically-sound and cost-effective
river management decisions. The legislation includes a provision
requiring landowner permission prior to disseminating information from
monitoring stations located on private lands to protect the privacy of
individual landowners. Finally, it provides for the National Research
Council of the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a comprehensive
water resources assessment of the Upper Mississippi River Basin.
Second, H.R. 3606, the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water
Management Act of 2001.
Before we hear from our witnesses, I now recognize the gentleman
from Wisconsin, Mr. Kind, the first bill's sponsor to further discuss
the bill.
______
Mr. Walden. And with that I would like to welcome our
witnesses, Mr. Keys and Dr. Hirsch, and would welcome your
comments at this time.
We will start with Mr. Keys. Good morning and welcome to
the Committee.
STATEMENT OF JOHN W. KEYS, III, COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF
RECLAMATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Keys. Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to be here and
talk with you about the H.R. 3606, the Wallowa Lake Dam
Rehabilitation and Water Management Act. I would ask that my
full written statement be made part of the record for this
hearing.
Mr. Walden. Without objection.
Mr. Keys. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 3606 would authorize
Reclamation to participate in the Wallowa Lake Dam
Rehabilitation and Water Management Program in Oregon, near
Joseph, Oregon. The proposed bill sets out an 80/20 cost-share
arrangement for this program, with the Government's share of
$32 million to be funded by the Bureau of Reclamation.
While we believe that there are merits to the proposed
program, the Department does not support H.R. 3606.
Wallowa Lake Dam is a privately owned dam constructed in
1918 and raised in 1929. It is owned and operated by the
Associated Ditch Companies in Oregon. Dam safety deficiencies
have been identified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
the Oregon Water Resources Department. Associated Ditch
Companies organized and led a partnership composed of the
Grande Ronde Model Watershed Council, Reclamation, and other
local, county and State agencies in developing the four-phased
plan for the program or the act. They did that to address dam
safety deficiencies and to the correction of these deficiencies
to encourage larger environmental issues in the Wallowa River
Basin.
The proposed act would begin construction in Fiscal Year
2002 and continue through the Fiscal Year 2007, at an estimated
cost of almost $39 million. The act calls for the Federal
Government to provide $32 million of that program cost.
While we fully understand the importance of ensuring the
safety of the Wallowa Lake Dam, this damn is not a Federal
project. It is a privately owned and operated facility, and it
falls under the Dam Safety Program of the Oregon Department of
Water Resources.
Reclamation believes that the Wallowa Lake Dam program is
worthwhile, with potential numerous benefits to the
environment, to the fish and so forth and to the dam itself.
However, we are concerned about the proposed Federal role in
the project.
Despite the very high Federal cost share for the project,
under H.R. 3606, there is no Federal interest in the dam and
none is provided by the bill. Moreover, there is no provision
for repayment by project beneficiaries in accordance with
Reclamation law.
Finally, Reclamation was not involved in the preparation of
the Phase I engineering document defined in the bill, and we
have not had the opportunity to review the designs of that
proposed plan.
Mr. Chairman, we are also concerned that Reclamation's
participation in this program would adversely impact ongoing
projects and operations of Reclamation. H.R. 3606 would
authorize the use of Reclamation funds for a non-Federal
purpose. Reclamation funds must be targeted to perform
essential functions at our Federal projects, such as the Bureau
of Reclamation's own Safety of Dams program, security of our
facilities, operation and maintenance, resource management and
construction.
In summary, the Department of Interior cannot, therefore,
support H.R. 3606. Mr. Chairman, that concludes my oral
comments. I would certainly be glad to answer any questions
that you might have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Keys follows:]
Statement of John W. Keys, III, Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation,
U.S. Department of the Interior, on H.R. 3606
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: I am John Keys,
Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation. I appreciate the opportunity
to present the Department's views on H.R. 3606, a bill that would
authorize Reclamation to participate in the Wallowa Lake Dam
Rehabilitation and Water Management Program in Oregon. H.R. 3606 sets
out an 80/20 cost share for this Program, under which the Federal
Government would pay $32 million funded through the Bureau of
Reclamation.
While we believe there are merits to the proposed program, the
Department does not support H.R. 3606.
Wallowa Lake Dam is a privately-owned dam constructed in 1918 and
raised in 1929, and is owned and operated by the Associated Ditch
Companies, Inc. (ADC). Dam safety deficiencies have been identified by
the US Army Corps of Engineers and Oregon Water Resources Department.
ADC, in conjunction with the Grande Ronde Model Watershed Council,
Reclamation, and other local, state, and Federal agencies, developed
the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management Program to
address dam safety deficiencies and to tie correction of those
deficiencies to larger environmental issues in the Wallowa River Basin.
The Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management Program is
proposed to begin in Fiscal Year 2002 and continue through Fiscal Year
2007, at an estimated total cost of $38,800,000. Under H.R. 3606, the
Federal Government would provide funding of $32,000,000.
Reclamation itself has an inventory of aging dams--and the
responsibility to ensure the safety and reliability of Reclamation dams
to protect the downstream public. Dam safety is one of Reclamation's
highest priorities. I would like to give you a sense of the scope of
our dam safety responsibilities: the Bureau has reservoirs impounded by
457 dams and dikes. Of these structures, 362 dams and dikes, located at
252 different project facilities, would likely cause loss of life if
they were to fail. Approximately 50 percent of Reclamation's dams were
built between 1900 and 1950, and about 90 percent of the dams were
built before currently-used state of the art design and construction
practices. Aging Reclamation-owned dams, which lack state-of-the-art
structural reliability features, require Reclamation to conduct
extensive ongoing risk management activities to assure safe dam
performance and protect the public from unreasonable risk.
While we fully understand the importance of ensuring the safety of
Wallowa Lake Dam, this dam is not a Federal project. It is privately
owned and operated, and falls under a dam safety program of the Oregon
Department of Water Resources. Reclamation believes the Wallowa Lake
Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management Program is worthwhile, with
potentially numerous benefits; however we are concerned about the
proposed Federal role in this project. Despite the very high Federal
cost share for the project, under H.R. 3606 there is currently no
Federal interest in the dam, and none is provided by the bill;
moreover, there is no provision for repayment by project beneficiaries
in accordance with reclamation law, and, finally, Reclamation was not
involved in the preparation of the ``Phase I'' engineering document
defined in section 2(3) of the bill nor have we reviewed it.
We are also concerned that Reclamation's participation in this
program would adversely impact ongoing projects and operations. H.R.
3606 would authorize the use of Reclamation funds for a non-Federal
purpose. Reclamation funds must be targeted to perform essential
functions at our Federal projects, such as security at BOR dams and
reservoirs, operations and maintenance (O&M), resource management, dam
safety, or construction. The Department cannot, therefore, support H.R.
3606.
______
Mr. Walden. Thank you, Mr. Keys.
Dr. Hirsch?
STATEMENT OF ROBERT M. HIRSCH, Ph.D., ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR
WATER, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Hirsch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and
members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
provide the views of the Department of Interior on H.R. 3480,
the Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act of 2001.
The administration agrees with the goals of H.R. 3480, and
we especially appreciate the bipartisan efforts of the sponsors
of the bill to address this important issue. We also appreciate
the emphasis that the bill places on sound science. However,
the administration has concerns about the financial resources
that would be required for the U.S. Geological Survey to carry
out the provisions of the bill.
The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior, acting
through the United States Geological Survey, to provide a
scientific basis for the management of sediment and nutrient
loss in the Upper Mississippi River Basin. This would be
accomplished through a sediment and nutrient monitoring
network; research and modeling that relates to sediment and
nutrient losses to landscape, land use and land management
characteristics; technical assistance regarding data
collection; and dissemination of information to managers,
scientists and the public.
The role identified in the bill for the USGS is consistent
with our leadership role in monitoring, interpretation,
research, and assessment of the health and status of the water
and biological resources of the Nation. As the Nation's largest
water, earth, and biological science and civilian mapping
agency, the USGS has been active in a number of programs of
great significance to the Upper Mississippi River Basin. Let me
briefly review these ongoing programs.
The USGS is an active participant in the Mississippi River-
Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force. This Task Force,
which has representation from Federal agencies, and State and
Tribal Governments in the basin, is charged with fulfilling
requirements of The Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research
and Control Act of 1998, by preparing a plan for controlling
hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico, and improving water
quality throughout the Mississippi River Basin.
The USGS has a lead role in the preparation of a science
report of the task force that defines what is currently known
about nutrient sources and transport in the Mississippi River
Basin. This is a baseline from which future water quality
trends and improvements will be made.
The USGS has offices in each of the five Upper Mississippi
River Basin States. These offices have a long history of
conducting water quality and quantity monitoring and assessment
activities within the basin. Existing USGS programs involved in
this effort include the National Water Quality Assessment
Program, the National Stream Quality Accounting Network, the
National Streamflow Information Program, the Toxic Substances
Hydrology Program, the Water Resources Research Act Program,
and the Cooperative Water Program, as well as reimbursable
programs that we operate, such as the Long-Term Resource
Monitoring Program funded by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
For the past 20 years, the USGS Upper Midwest Environmental
Sciences Center, known as UMESC, in La Crosse, Wisconsin, has
provided research support in the Upper Mississippi River Basin
to Department of Interior Agencies and to the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers to address complex issues of navigation,
contaminants and other natural resource concerns.
More recently, the Center has developed an active
partnership with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation
Service on sediment and nutrient concerns of the agencies. For
15 years, the UMESC has provided the scientific and management
leadership for the Long-Term Resource Monitoring Program of the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Environmental Management Program
for the Upper Mississippi River Basin main stem rivers. This
monitoring program of water quality, fisheries, vegetation,
land use, and other critical indicators of river health is the
largest main stem river assessment program in the Nation.
H.R. 3480 acknowledges the need to use all existing
monitoring and science programs of the USGS and others while
identifying information needs in the Upper Mississippi River
Basin. These existing programs can help to define how water
quality conditions are affected by human activities and natural
climatic variations. This is a necessary step in understanding
how management actions will improve water quality conditions in
the Mississippi River Basin.
The provisions of H.R. 3480 are consistent with Gulf of
Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force recommendations with
regard to science and management activities. The proposed
legislation describes a program consistent with current USGS
activities. The goals of the bill are commendable, and the bill
contains provisions that are well within the scope and
expertise of the USGS. However, funding for the activities of
H.R. 3480 is not included in the Fiscal Year 2003 President's
budget proposal.
One concern we would like to express is that we believe
that the cost-sharing provisions of this bill should conform
with other similar programs, such as the USGS Cooperative Water
Program, which requires a dollar-per-dollar match of Federal
and non-Federal funds.
On a personal note, I would like to say that I have had the
good fortune to participate in the USGS research crews on the
Upper Mississippi River, and I am very proud of the monitoring,
modeling, and research that we have conducted, as the
Mississippi River and its basin is one of the Nation's unique
natural resources. Developing the scientific knowledge that is
needed to help manage this resource is a welcome challenge for
the scientists at the USGS.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to present
this testimony, and I will be pleased to answer any questions
you or other members might have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hirsch follows:]
Statement of Robert M. Hirsch, Associate Director for Water, U.S.
Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior, on H.R. 3480
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to provide the views of the Department of the Interior
(DOI) on H.R. 3480, the ``Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act
of 2001.'' The Administration agrees with the goals of H.R. 3480; we
especially appreciate the bi-partisan efforts of the sponsors of the
bill to address this important issue and emphasis within the bill on
the need for reliance on sound science. The Administration has concerns
about the financial resources that would be required for the United
States Geological Survey (USGS) to carry out this bill in the context
of the availability of resources overall for Administration programs.
Further, some provisions of the bill may be duplicative of existing
Federal and State programs.
The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the
United States Geological Survey, to provide a scientific basis for the
management of sediment and nutrient loss in the Upper Mississippi
River. This would be accomplished through establishing a sediment and
nutrient monitoring network that builds on existing monitoring
activities; conducting research and modeling that relates sediment and
nutrient losses to landscape, land use and land management
characteristics; providing technical assistance regarding use of
consistent and reliable methods for data collection; and instituting a
program to disseminate new information to managers, scientists and the
public.
The role identified for DOI in this bill is consistent with USGS's
leadership role in monitoring, interpretation, research, and assessment
of the health and status of the water and biological resources of the
Nation. As the Nation's largest water, earth, and biological science,
and civilian mapping agency, USGS conducts the largest single non-
regulatory ambient water-quality monitoring activity in the Nation.
Furthermore, the USGS has been active in a number of programs and
investigations that involve the Upper Mississippi River Basin (UMRB)
specifically.
The USGS is an active participant in the Mississippi River, Gulf of
Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force. This Task Force, which has
representation from Federal agencies, and State and Tribal governments
in the basin, is charged with fulfilling requirements of The Harmful
Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998, by preparing
a plan for controlling hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico, and
shares a common goal of improving water-quality conditions in the
Mississippi River Basin.
The USGS also has had a lead role in the preparation of a science
report that uses available water-quality information to define a recent
baseline condition for nutrient sources and loads in the Mississippi
River Basin--a baseline from which future water-quality trends and
improvements will be measured. This report identifies those parts of
the Upper Mississippi River Basin that have the highest nutrient
yields.
The USGS has offices in each of the five Upper Mississippi River
Basin States. These offices have a long history of conducting water-
quantity and water-quality monitoring and assessment activities within
the basin. Existing USGS programs include the National Water-Quality
Assessment Program, the National Stream Quality Accounting Network, the
National Streamflow Information Program, the Toxic Substances Hydrology
Program, the Water Resources Research Act Program, and the Cooperative
Water Program, as well as reimbursable programs we operate, such as the
Long-Term Resource Monitoring Program funded by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. These programs currently provide information on nutrients
and sediment within the basin.
For the past 20 years, the USGS Upper Midwest Environmental
Sciences Center (UMESC) in La Crosse, Wisconsin has provided research
support in the Upper Mississippi River Basin to Department of the
Interior agencies and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to address
complex issues of navigation, contaminants, and other natural resource
concerns. More recently, this Center has developed an active
partnership with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service on
sediment and nutrient concerns of the agencies. For 15 years, the UMESC
has provided the scientific and management leadership for the Long-term
Resource Monitoring Program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer's
Environmental Management Program for the Upper Mississippi River Basin
main stem rivers. This monitoring program of water quality, fisheries,
vegetation, land use, and other critical indicators of river health is
the largest main stem river assessment program in the Nation.
The USGS conducts monitoring activities in cooperation with many
States and local governments in the Upper Mississippi River Basin. The
USGS is also active in hydrologic and water-quality studies in the
Lower Mississippi River Basin. The continuity of research is important
from the standpoint of developing a complete assessment of the entire
Mississippi River basin. To this end, the USGS has begun a partnership
this year with the Long-term Estuary Assessment Group, centered at
Tulane University.
H.R. 3480 acknowledges the need to use all existing monitoring and
science programs of the USGS and others while identifying information
needs in the Upper Mississippi River Basin. Existing programs and
development of models are tools for defining how water-quality
conditions are affected by human activities and natural climatic
variations and how management actions may best improve water-quality
conditions at a wide range of scales from small watersheds to the
Mississippi River Basin.
Furthermore, the bill would authorize integration of activities
conducted in cooperation with other Federal partners and would
emphasize and expand the existing USGS coordination and assistance to
State monitoring programs. For example, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service's (FWS) Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program restores wetland
habitat in watersheds across the country, including the Upper
Mississippi River Basin. The FWS is available to apply its expertise to
the reduction of sediment and nutrient loss in the basin through
participation in demonstration projects, technical assistance, and
working groups. We recognize the need to ensure that future monitoring
activities complement and do not duplicate State monitoring activities.
The provisions of H.R. 3480 are consistent with Gulf of Mexico
Watershed Nutrient Task Force recommendations with regard to science
and management activities. The proposed legislation describes a program
consistent with current USGS activities to support protection of the
UMRB.
In summary, the goals of the bill are commendable, and the bill
contains provisions that are within the scope and expertise of the
USGS, and that may be met by other on-going programs. However, funding
for the activities in H.R. 3480 is not included in the Fiscal Year 2003
President's Budget proposal and would remain subject to available
resources. Also, there are several provisions of the bill with which we
have concerns. We believe that the cost-sharing provisions of this bill
should conform with other similar programs, such as the USGS
Cooperative Water Program which requires a dollar for dollar match of
Federal and non-Federal funds.
We welcome the opportunity to discuss with the Committee the
matters of concern to us and ways to best achieve the important
purposes of the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to
present this testimony. I will be pleased to answer questions you and
other members of the Subcommittee might have.
______
Mr. Walden. Thank you very much, Doctor.
Now I would like to extend the opportunity for Mr. Kind,
who has joined us, to give us an opening statement, if you
would like, and then we will take questions.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. RON KIND, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN
Mr. Kind. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have a written
statement I would like to submit for the record, without
objection.
Mr. Walden. Without objection.
Mr. Kind. Thank you.
I thank you, Director Hirsch, for your willingness to come
and testify in regards to the legislation and all of the
witnesses who have been called to testify before the Committee
today.
I would also like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member
of this Committee, Mr. Calvert and Mr. Smith, for their
willingness to hold the hearing, as well as the Chair and
Ranking Member of the Full Committee, and the staff for working
closely with us on refining and fine-tuning the legislation, it
is very much appreciated, as well as Mr. Tauzin and his staff,
who had some suggestions on how we can improve the legislation.
Mr. Chairman, this bill that was reintroduced in December,
it has actually been pending before this Committee, this
Congress for the last few years. It has been a personal quest
of mine since I became a Member of Congress a few years ago to
do everything that I can with my colleagues to better preserve
and protect one of the great natural treasures that exist in
the country, the Upper Mississippi River Basin, and the huge
impact that it has not only on the communities directly in the
basin, but the entire country as a whole.
When you look at the Mississippi River Basin, what you are
really talking about is everything west of the Appalachian
Mountains and everything east of the Rocky Mountains. It
encompasses a geographic area of roughly 40 percent of the
continental United States, and locally, the Upper Mississippi
region, has about a $1.2-billion recreation impact, a $6.6-
billion economic. It is also the primary drinking water source
for 22 million Americans, and it is the largest migratory route
in North America, with roughly 40 percent of the water fowl
flying down and flying back up again the Mississippi River
corridor.
But there is a lot of concern, for those of us who are
familiar with the river and from the experts who I have talked
to in regards to the sustainability of the river basin as a
whole. If you talk to the experts, and we have some of those
witnesses here today, they say one of the chief challenges that
we face in regards to maintaining the sustainability of the
river is being able to better track the sediment and nutrients
that flow into the river basin.
This stuff has adversely affected this very valuable
ecosystem by filling in back bays, by ruining natural habitat,
by the flow that is occurring in the Upper Mississippi region,
the impact it also has in the Southern region, and that is what
3480 is meant to address.
It is trying to put the science in place, where we can
develop comprehensive monitoring, a network between the
Federal, State and local agencies, and developing a private-
public partnership and doing a better job of monitoring what is
happening in the system, and then developing the computer
models so that we know what is taking place and then what best
practices, best management plan can be put in place to better
protect the river basin as a whole.
It has been a work in progress, a collaborative effort. The
other thing that I did as a new Member of Congress was help
form a Mississippi River Bipartisan Task Force, a Caucus. I
have a letter from the two current chairs of the task force,
Kenny Hulshof and Len Boswell, in support of the legislation,
that I would like to introduce for the record, at this time.
Mr. Walden. Without objection.
[The letter from Messrs. Hulshof and Boswell follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78048.003
Mr. Kind. And also what we are proposing in this
legislation is consistent with the work that has been taking
place with the Hypoxia Task Force and their current action
plan.
In fact, I also have a letter from a variety of Governors
of the States along the Mississippi River-- Louisiana,
Missouri, Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Minnesota--
supporting the goals of the task force and the action plan in
place. In fact, in their letter they indicate, ``To succeed,
this effort will require an extensive program that is supported
by States and funded and coordinated by the Federal
Government.''
They also go on to state in the letter, ``A parallel
monitoring effort conducted jointly by USGS and the States is
required within the basin to determine the water quality
effects of the actions taken and to measure the success of
efforts on a sub-basin and project level.''
That is, I would submit, entirely consistent with the goals
and the objective of this legislation. When it was reintroduced
in December, we had seventeen original co-sponsors, nine ``Ds''
and eight ``Rs,'' which shows the broad bipartisan support that
the legislation has. I am not aware of any colleague in
Congress that opposes the legislation or any group outside who
opposes the legislation or any group outside who opposes the
legislation. In fact, we have worked very closely with a whole
host of groups and agencies to determine what the best course
of action would be.
So I thank the Committee again for the opportunity to hold
a hearing on this important piece of legislation and the
witnesses who have come to testify, and I look forward to
hearing your testimony.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kind follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Ron Kind, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Wisconsin, on H.R. 3480
Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee for the
opportunity to comment on H.R. 3480, the Upper Mississippi River Basin
Protection Act. While I have spoken before this Subcommittee on similar
legislation in the 106th Congress, H.R. 3480 is a much more focused
bill, specifically designed to enhance existing monitoring programs on
the Upper Mississippi River Basin, and provide reliable, scientific
data for targeting future nutrient and sediment reduction efforts.
The Upper Mississippi River system, whose tributaries and basin
encompass much of Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, and Missouri,
is widely recognized as one of our nation's great multi-use natural
resources. While the Mississippi River and its tributaries provide
drinking water to approximately 22 million Americans, the system's
1,300 navigable miles transport millions of tons of commercial cargo
via barges. In addition, 40% of North America's waterfowl use the
wetlands and backwaters of the main stem as a migratory flyway,
illustrating the environmental significance of the system as well as
recreation capabilities. Overall, the Upper Mississippi River Basin
provides $1.2 billion annually in recreation income and $6.6 billion to
the area's tourism industries.
Unfortunately, high sediment and nutrient levels threaten the
health of the river system and the vast recreational, agricultural, and
industrial activities it supports. Sediment fills the main shipping
channel of the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers, costing over $100
million each year to dredge. Nutrient inputs degrade water quality in
the Upper Mississippi River system and impact far downstream to the
Gulf of Mexico.
As a basis for making effective decisions for improving water
quality, accurate data must be available. Building the nutrient and
sediment monitoring system that provides this data will require
extensive communication and coordination between government agencies at
the Federal, state, and local levels, as well as other stakeholders. By
utilizing existing monitoring programs to the maximum extent possible,
H.R. 3480 builds upon existing efforts by authorizing the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) to coordinate and integrate these efforts,
expand where necessary, develop guidelines for data collection and
storage, and establish an electronic database system to store and
disseminate information. USGS would also establish a state-of-the-art
computer modeling program to identify significant nutrient and sediment
sources, at the subwatershed level, to better target reduction efforts.
In addition, H.R. 3480 includes strong protections for the privacy of
personal data collected and used in connection with monitoring and
modeling activities.
The need for accurate and comprehensive data collection is
essential to addressing the problems of the Upper Mississippi River
Basin. In crafting this legislation, I have worked with farmers, the
navigation industry, sporting groups, environmental organizations, and
government agencies throughout the region. As co-chair of the Upper
Mississippi River Basin Congressional Task Force, I have also worked to
build consensus among regional legislators on how best to approach the
natural resource challenges of the basin.
While focused in the Upper Mississippi River Basin, the benefits of
the programs authorized in this bill would extend far beyond the five-
state region, because nutrients and sediments from the Upper Midwest
have impacts all the way down the Mississippi and into the Gulf of
Mexico. Moreover, I see this approach as a pilot for future watershed
and basin initiatives in other parts of the nation.
As you know, water quality problems in the Mississippi River Basin
cross traditional state and administrative boundaries. Solving these
problems requires a coordinated and cooperative approach between the
Federal, state, and local agencies and groups working throughout the
region. H.R. 3480 represents a common-sense move toward building the
scientific foundation necessary to remedying nutrient and sediment
problems in the region.
Thank you for the opportunity to share my remarks on this important
legislation. I appreciate your consideration and I urge the
Subcommittee's support.
______
Mr. Walden. Thank you. Did you want to insert the letter
from the Governors?
Mr. Kind. I would, without objection.
Mr. Walden. Without objection, it will be added in.
Mr. Kind. Thank you.
[The letter from the six Governors submitted for the record
by Mr. Kind follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78048.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 78048.002
Mr. Walden. Thank you.
Mr. Keys, let us focus on House Bill 3606 for a second, the
Wallowa Lake Dam issue. Is there ever any Federal interest in a
non-Federal facility, from your perspective?
Mr. Keys. Mr. Chairman, I think all of us are always
interested when we see a facility that is not safe. Who funds
it and how you take care of it is another issue. In the past,
we have worked with some non-Federal facilities, but when we
did that, they actually became part of the project.
Mr. Walden. Part of the Federal project.
Mr. Keys. Yes, sir. An example is over on the Ochoco
project in your district there, that was an old private dam
that became part of the Federal project when we added on to it,
and then we went back in and did safety and damage repairs on
it. It became part of the Federal project and became part of
the repayment obligation under Reclamation law.
Mr. Walden. As you are aware, there is a need for
rehabilitation of this facility. This is pretty obvious I think
to all of us. Who would you suggest then that we could turn to
for help, if we do not go that approach, the Federalizing
approach? Are there other resources out there we can bring to
bear? This is a small community in a very economically
devastated part of my district.
Mr. Keys. Mr. Chairman, in other places that we have worked
with a private facility like that that is done on safety, we
worked with the States involved.
In the Northwest there, Oregon, Washington, Idaho have
worked with us on our Safety of Dams Program and us working
cooperatively with them on their Safety of Dams Programs for a
long time.
I know that those three States have mechanisms for funding
those kinds of corrections. I don't know what was done in the
Wallowa Lake Dam process for them to seek funding from the
State of Oregon, though.
Mr. Walden. All right. Are you aware of the Bureau's
involvement in conservation and fisheries issues in the Upper
Basin that date back like to 1984 and obligations under the
ESA?
Mr. Keys. Mr. Chairman, yes, I am.
Mr. Walden. Is there a nexus there we can look onto, Mr.
Keys?
Mr. Keys. Mr. Chairman, dealing with the Endangered Species
Act and those listed salmon there have been a challenge to
Reclamation since they were listed in 1990, 1991.
There are a number of actions that are underway to try to
do offsite mitigation, to provide waters for helping move the
fish up and down the river. That part of this proposal is a
good proposal. For them to be able to try to set up an exchange
there is something that we have participated in and encouraged
them to do. It is a good part of the program. It is just that
the Safety of Dams part of it makes it not acceptable.
The way they deal with the power plant in this funding is
also something that causes us pause.
Mr. Walden. From what perspective?
Mr. Keys. Mr. Chairman, from the perspective that they are
asking for Federal money to go in and put a power plant in, us
not have any ownership, us not get any of the benefit from the
generation there, that it become part of the Federal grid.
The precedent of spending Reclamation money, when we need
to spend that money on our own Safety of Dams Program, to spend
that money building a power plant, when we have our own system
to operate, and maintain and try to add to just causes us
pause.
Mr. Walden. Can you tell me, if you know, what kind of the
backlog is of your Federal Dams Safety Program in terms of
cost?
Mr. Keys. Mr. Chairman, I would not say that we have a
backlog in our Safety of Dams Program. We have a long list of
facilities to take a look at. We have planned schedule to do
that. We, this year, in 2002, are finishing up work at Pine
View. We are doing the work at Horse Tooth and in Wickiup in
your district.
Mr. Walden. Right.
Mr. Keys. We should finish up Pine View this year and pick
up Keechelus, in the State of Washington, to start on next
year.
Those monies that we have are adequate for meeting that
schedule. We have to come back for reauthorization of the act
next year because the authorization and funding levels that we
have now run out in the year 2003.
Mr. Walden. Thank you very much, Mr. Keys.
Mr. Kind, do you have any questions of our witnesses?
Mr. Kind. Just a couple for Director Hirsch.
First of all, thank you for your testimony and for the
feedback that you have been able to give our office in working
with us.
Just so we are clear, is the stated purpose and goals of
the legislation consistent with the type of work that USGS is
currently involved in, in better preserving and protecting the
Upper Mississippi River Basin, in your opinion?
Mr. Hirsch. Yes, absolutely. It is quite consistent.
Mr. Kind. Is it, in your opinion, consistent with the Gulf
of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force and the recommendations
that they made, especially as it relates to the scientific and
the research portion of what needs to be done to address that
issue?
Mr. Hirsch. Yes, it certainly is.
Mr. Kind. I share your concern in regards to the funding
level of the variety of USGS water monitoring and water quality
programs in that. I think, at a time, given the work that has
been done with the task force down South and the collaborative
network of cooperation that exists in the Upper Miss area, too,
that we need to be moving more in the direction of increased
water monitoring and even in establishing a modeling network in
that.
But it is a little disheartening to see so many current
water gauges being taken out of service at a time when we
really should be protecting that and, in fact, expanding that
so we know what is happening and what the best management
practice is, but obviously that will be an issue for the
Congress to decide, in regards to the appropriate allocation of
resources.
Let me just quickly compliment USGS. I have seen your
offices and the personnel that you have working in them, and
the professionalism and the scientific expertise that they
bring to a whole host of issues, whether it is long-term
resource monitoring and even some of the modeling now that they
are starting to dab into. I think this legislation is very
consistent and a nice mesh with the type of quality that exists
with USGS personnel you have in place and the type of work that
is being conducted. Would you say that is an accurate
statement?
Mr. Hirsch. Yes, and thank you for the compliments. We are
indeed proud of what we have been doing. I recently visited our
office in La Crosse and was most impressed by the work that
they do there.
Mr. Kind. Right. Well, thank you very much again for your
testimony and your feedback. We will be happy to continue
working with you and your entire office as we move forward.
Thank you.
Mr. Walden. Thank you, Mr. Kind.
Gentlemen, thank you for being here today. We appreciate
your testimony very much.
I would like to call up our second panel of witnesses; Mr.
Schnoor, Mr. Daigle, Holly Stoerker, and John McLachlan, and
Mr. McMillen as well.
Mr. McMillen, we will start with you, since you are the
only other witness on H.R. 3606--clearly, the most important
bill before this Subcommittee this morning.
[Laughter.]
STATEMENT OF MORTON McMILLEN, MONTGOMERY WATSON HARZA
Mr. McMillen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My name is Morton McMillen, and I am here today
representing the Steering Committee for the Wallowa Lake Dam
Rehabilitation and Management Project. I am currently a design
engineer with Montgomery Watson Harza, assigned to their Boise,
Idaho, office, where I serve as a senior project engineer and
manager for water resources and aquaculture projects.
Mr. Walden. Mr. McMillen, push down the button. There you
go.
Mr. McMillen. I wish to thank the U.S. House of
Representatives and the Subcommittee on Water and Power for the
opportunity to testify on behalf of Bill H.R. 3606 to authorize
the Bureau of Reclamation to participate in the Wallowa Lake
Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management Plan. It is truly an
honor to be present here in our Nation's capital and work with
elected leaders of this Nation.
As a member of the Steering Committee and a native of
Wallowa County, I bring a project proposal before you which is
founded in the soil of rural Wallowa County. This project
balances the needs of competing demands for our precious water
resources, while protecting the economic foundation of the
community. This project was framed by the local residents to
meet the needs of agriculture, flood control, recreation and
water supply, while also protecting and enhancing our
invaluable fish and wildlife resources.
Wallowa Lake Dam is located on the natural outlet of
Wallowa Lake and provides up to 50,000 acre-feet of storage.
The dam was originally constructed in 1918 and raised in 1929
to provide additional storage for irrigation and hydropower
generation. The reservoir has historically provided high-
quality water, supporting a wide range of uses, which include:
irrigation; potable water supply for the city of Joseph; it has
a huge recreation opportunity, with over 800,000 recreational
users per year that visit the lake; the flood control, with
active storage managed to provide flood protection in the
Cities of Joseph, Enterprise, and Wallowa during spring runoff
periods; and it also comprises base flows to the Wallowa River
and the Grande Ronde Rivers, which currently have listed
species for spring chinook and bull trout.
The ADC embarked on the planning and design of long-term
improvements to Wallowa Lake Dam and quickly realized that the
dam was the central structure to water management within
Wallowa Valley. The balance between agricultural needs and the
salmon recovery was identified as one of the primary program
elements. The Nez Perce Tribe, in cooperation with the Oregon
Department of Fish & Wildlife, with oversight by the National
Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service,
have begun the planning and implementation of salmon recovery
measures throughout the Wallowa Valley.
An integrated water management plan for the Wallowa River
Corridor is necessary to ensure these measures are successful,
as well as meet demands from a widespread spectrum of
additional users.
ADC invited members of the community, State resource
agencies, and Federal agencies to participate in the
development of a water management plan, which considered the
multi-purpose water demands. Through this coordinated effort, a
partnership was formed led by the ADC and the Grande Ronde
Model Watershed, with technical assistance in the upper valley
by Montgomery Watson Harza and in the lower valley by the
Bureau of Reclamation.
An integrated plan was formulated addressing water
management issues within the length of the corridor. The basic
elements of this plan are presented within the Wallowa Lake Dam
Rehabilitation and Water Management Plan Vision Statement,
dated February 2001.
There are a number of benefits in addition to dam safety
for this project. These benefits include flood protection;
there is water conservation, through improved irrigation
methods; potable water supply; fish passage and protection,
including enhancement and reintroduction of coho and sockeye
salmon in the basin; continued recreation use; provisions for
additional hydropower to meet future demands so we don't have a
repeat of what happened last year; fish protection; agriculture
production; increased tourism; and economic stability.
The Wallowa Valley economy has historically been founded in
natural resource industries, primarily agriculture and timber.
Wallowa Lake Dam has provided irrigation water support to
agriculture development. As with most rural communities,
timber-based industries are rapidly disappearing. Tourism has
become an increasingly important part of the local economy.
Wallowa Lake is the principal draw to this area. Rehabilitation
of the dam and enhancement of the fishery resources will
provide additional tourism dollars to the local economy.
The experience and knowledge gained from this project will
also serve watershed planning efforts throughout the Northwest.
This program will outline the framework and institutional
requirements to implement a true watershed approach to
balancing competing demands for our water supplies. The
grassroots-driven approach, which anticipates and plans for
regulatory requirements, rather than reacting to regulatory
enforcement, is critical to maintain economic stability and
cooperative working environments.
We strongly support the passing of Bill H.R. 3606,
authorizing the Bureau of Reclamation to participate in the
rehabilitation of the Wallowa Lake Dam in Oregon and for other
purposes. This project has its root in the Wallowa Valley. The
local residents developed the framework for the project to
address current pressing dam safety issues, as well as
anticipating future regulatory requirements. These stakeholders
have proactively formed a Steering Committee and invited all
interested agencies to participate and become part of the
solution.
We have received written letters of support from the
National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service, Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife, and the Nez
Perce Tribe.
The Steering Committee initiated the planning and
coordination for this project prior to the Klamath Falls
calamity. The committee implemented a cooperative program,
requesting up-front coordination with the participating
agencies. The proposed project elements represent a balance
between what is physically, institutionally and financially
feasible. This grassroots approach is the foundation to a
successful project development, implementation, and operation.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McMillen follows:]
Statement of Morton D. McMillen, Principal Engineer, Montgomery Watson
Harza, Boise, Idaho, Representing Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and
Water Management Plan Steering Committee
Dear Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee on Water and
Power:
We wish to thank the members of the U.S. House of Representatives
and the Subcommittee on Water and Power for the opportunity to testify
on behalf of bill H.R. 3606 to authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to
participate in the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management
Plan. It is truly an honor to be present here in our Nation's Capital
and participate in the democratic process which is the foundation of
our Country.
As a member of the Steering Committee and native of Wallowa County,
I bring a project proposal before you which is founded in the soil of
Wallowa County, balances the needs of competing demands for our
precious water resources, and protects the economic foundation of the
community. This project was framed by the local residents to meet the
needs of agriculture, recreation, flood control, recreation and water
supply while also protecting our invaluable fish and wildlife
resources.
The Steering Committee requested that I present written and verbal
testimony to this Subcommittee hearing representing the interests of
the Steering Committee partners. My understanding of the engineering
and scientific basis for the proposed project as well as a hands on
understanding of the issues facing the local residents was the basis
for this selection. My roots are firmly entrenched in the Wallowa
Valley and I bring a personal commitment to see this project through to
completion to the Subcommittee.
My family originally homesteaded in the Grangeville, Idaho area and
relocated to the Wallowa County in 1948. My grandfather raised cattle
and farmed until his retirement in 1975. My father and most of my
relatives have been employed in the agriculture or timber industry
within Wallowa County. I was raised on a cattle farm outside of
Enterprise and grew up using the irrigation systems provided with water
stored behind Wallowa Lake Dam. My father served as the foreman for an
Angus cattle ranch and my mother was a charge nurse at the Wallowa
County nursing home.
Upon graduation from Enterprise High School, I attended the
University of Idaho at Moscow, Idaho graduating with a degree in Civil
Engineering in May 1986. My first professional employment was with the
Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District. I started employment
with the Corps as a cooperative education student in 1984 and continued
following graduation until 1989. While with the Corps, I was actively
involved in the planning and design of fish passage and production
facilities within the Snake River Basin, including the Grande Ronde
River for which the Wallowa River is a tributary. Specific project
experience included juvenile and adult passage projects on the Lower
Snake River dams, hatchery production facilities on the Clearwater and
Snake River, and acclimation facilities in Idaho and Eastern Oregon. My
work experience also includes design of flood control structures
including dams, channels, and pipelines.
I returned to graduate school in 1989 at Stanford University where
I focused on expanding my background into water quality and treatment
process design. Upon graduation, I entered the private engineering
industry. For the past 9 years I have been employed at Montgomery
Watson Harza where I serve as a senior project engineer and manager for
water resources and aquaculture projects. I have been involved in
projects throughout the Umatilla, Walla Walla, and Grande Ronde River
Basins.
This written testimony was developed to provide a summary of the
background and elements of the project, the benefits and schedule, and
the importance of the project to the community and watershed planning
in future basins. The testimony is organized as follows:
LProject Background summarizing the events leading to the
program development.
LMission Statement guiding the program development.
LIdentified Issues addressed within the program.
LWater Management Plan and Infrastructure project
elements.
LProactive Agency Coordination which has occurred
LProactive Coordination with Other Programs which has
occurred.
LAchieved Visible Accomplishments already derived.
LMeasurable Benefits resulting from the program.
LBudget and Schedule requirements.
LSummary
Project Background
The Wallowa Valley is located in Northeast Oregon approximately 330
miles east of Portland, Oregon. The valley is encircled by the Wallowa
Mountains, Blue Mountains, and Seven Devil Mountains. Located one mile
south of Joseph, Oregon, Wallowa Lake sits at the base of the Wallowa
Mountains and is fed by a drainage basin over 50 square miles in size
located within the Eagle Cap Wilderness Area.
Wallowa Lake Dam is located on the natural outlet of Wallowa Lake
and provides up to 50,000 acres-feet of storage. The dam was originally
constructed in 1918 and raised in 1929 to provide additional storage
for irrigation and hydropower generation. The dam is owned and operated
by the Associated Ditch Companies, Incorporated (ADC).
Fed from wilderness area high in the Wallowa Mountains, the Wallowa
Lake reservoir has historically provided high quality water supporting
a wide range of uses including:
LIrrigation of over 15,000 acres of prime agricultural
land within the Wallowa Valley.
LPotable water supply for the City of Joseph.
LRecreation with over 800,000 recreational users enjoying
boating, water skiing, personal water craft, swimming, and fishing.
LFlood control with the active storage managed to provide
flood protection to the Cities of Joseph, Enterprise, and Wallowa
during spring runoff periods.
LBase flows to the Wallowa River and Grande Ronde Rivers
preserving and enhancing riparian habitat, fish stocks, water fowl, and
overall water quality.
Wallowa Lake Dam was listed as a high hazard structure in March of
1996 by the Oregon Water Resources Department of Dam Safety. The sudden
failure and release of water would probably result in loss of life as
well as severe economic and environmental damage. The ADC moved quickly
to implement short-term structural improvements in 1996 to stabilize
the dam. The reservoir has subsequently been held below full pool
elevation to maintain safety.
The ADC embarked on the planning and design of long term
improvements to Wallowa Lake Dam and quickly realized that the dam was
the central structure to water management within the Wallowa Valley.
The balance between agricultural needs and salmon recovery was
identified as one of the primary program elements. The Nez Perce Tribe
in cooperation with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife are
actively planning and implementing salmon recovery measures throughout
the Wallowa Valley. An integrated water management plan for the Wallowa
River corridor is necessary to ensure these measures are successful as
well as meet demands from a wide spectrum of additional users.
ADC invited members of the community, state resource agencies, and
Federal agencies to participate in the development of a water
management plan, which considered the multi-purpose water demands.
Through this coordinated effort, a partnership was formed led by the
ADC and the Grande Ronde Model Watershed Program with technical
assistance provided by Montgomery Watson Harza. An integrated plan was
formulated addressing water management issues through the length of the
Wallowa River Corridor. The basic elements of this plan are presented
within the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management Plan
Vision Statement, dated February 2001.
Mission Statement
The steering committee set out to define the goals and objectives
at the onset of the project development. These objectives are clearly
summarized in the project Mission Statement:
``To rehabilitate Wallowa Lake Dam and implement a water
management program for the Wallowa Valley serving the needs of
agriculture, salmon recovery, fish and wildlife enhancement,
recreation, flood control, municipal water supply, and
hydropower generation.''
This mission statement serves as the foundation of the program upon
which progress and benefits will be measured. Throughout the project
development and implementation, the steering committee will return to
the mission statement to ensure the project is managed within the
original mission framework.
Identified Issues
Water management issues within the Wallowa River corridor, both
environmental and infrastructure needs were identified by the study
team through pre-planning work tasks and coordination meetings. The
primary issues identified were:
LWallowa Lake Dam does not meet current dam safety
requirements for stability against sliding and overturning, earthquake
resistance, spillway capacity, and outlet tunnel condition. The dam is
listed as a high hazard structure by the Oregon State Department of Dam
Safety and major improvements are necessary to protect human life and
property.
LThree irrigation withdrawals downstream from the dam are
unscreened potentially impacting ESA listed bull trout and salmon.
LAccurate water measurement and control are not possible
with the existing manual diversion gates. Without these systems in
place, active conservation efforts would be difficult to implement and
monitor.
LAdult fish passage at Wallowa Lake Dam will be required
to support the re-introduction of coho and sockeye salmon to Wallowa
Lake as part of the Wallowa County Salmon Recovery Plan.
LIrrigation withdrawals in the Lostine River create low
flow conditions impassable to migrating ESA listed Spring Chinook
salmon and Bull Trout.
LHydropower production with the dam water releases is not
being realized.
LCurrent water management in the Wallowa River corridor is
fragmented with competing needs for irrigation and salmon recovery
efforts.
Water Management Plan and Infrastructure
The participating partners have developed a phased project approach
focusing on early action on the high priority project elements. The
phased approach allows the planning and design of the complete project,
then implementation of the infrastructure in a sequenced manner. The
project phases are:
LPhase I--Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water
Management Plan Development
LPhase II--Fish Passage Improvements and Water
Conservation Measures
LPhase III--Implementation of Water Exchange
Infrastructure
LPhase IV--Hydropower Implementation
Rehabilitation of Wallowa Lake Dam is the critical element to the
success of the program. The dam serves as the water management tool for
storing and releasing water to support the multi-purpose uses. The
priority of Phase I is to plan, design, and construct the recommended
improvements to Wallowa Lake Dam. With the dam rehabilitation complete,
operation will return to the full pool storage elevation. Water from
the storage reservoir will then be allocated to the Lostine River and
Bear Creek Valley irrigators in exchange for Lostine River water to
remain within the river. A water management plan will be developed
outlining the water management framework for the Wallowa River corridor
including the water exchange from the storage reservoir.
The Phase I work will also complete the planning and environmental
analysis required to support implementation of the integrated water
management plan. The administrative, policy, and management framework
required to develop a successful water management plan will be
developed. The mechanism and infrastructure necessary to address the
critical water management issues will be identified and serve as the
basis for the subsequent work phases.
Phase II will focus on the planning and implementation of fish
screens, automated head gates, and flow measurement devices at the
unscreened diversions. Provisions for adult fish passage will be
planned as part of the Phase I work and implemented in Phase II to
support re-introduction of coho and sockeye salmon to Wallowa Lake. The
Nez Perce Tribe are currently preparing a masterplan outlining the
requirements for coho re-introduction within the Wallowa Valley.
With Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation complete, the stored water
will be available to supplement irrigation needs within the Lostine
River and Bear Creek Valleys. Phase III will plan, design, and
implement the infrastructure and institutional framework to execute a
water exchange. The infrastructure requirements include pumps and
pipelines to transfer water from the Wallowa River to the Lostine and
Bear Creek Valley irrigation system. Lostine River water will remain in
the river during the critical spring chinook salmon migration period of
late July through September. Storage in Wallowa Lake will be reserved
to supplement irrigation demands in the Lostine Valley during this
period. The Bonneville Power Administration has completed the predesign
for new production facilities on the Lostine River designed to
supplement and enhance runs of ESA listed spring chinook salmon. The
production facilities will be completed in December 2005 which concurs
with the scheduled completion of Phase III.
Phase IV will evaluate and implement a hydropower facility to
recover energy from water releases from Wallowa Lake Dam. A generation
plant was operated at the dam for many years, but was decommissioned
following a fire in the 1950's. With the current increase in power
rates throughout the country, re-establishing a hydropower facility at
the facility is a prudent step. Plans are in place to donate revenue in
excess of cost to support the Wallowa County Hospital. The hospital has
been operating unprofitably for many years and is threatened with
closing. The hydropower facility would provide the hospital with a
stable revenue stream and benefit the community. The proposed
hydroelectric generation facility provides a renewable energy source
operating with environmental measures in place to protect endangered
species and maintain water quality.
Proactive Agency Coordination
The partners have been working over the past two years to develop a
framework for planning and implementation of the program. This
framework is designed with a foundation led by local Wallowa County
groups and extending to the support of State and Federal agencies. This
grass roots approach has led to a number of accomplishments.
LDevelopment of a steering committee to assist in
development and guidance of the program. This steering committee is led
by strong local groups, which are the Grande Ronde Model Watershed and
the ADC.
LCoordination with the Nez Perce Tribe and the Oregon
Department of Fish in Wildlife to integrate ongoing salmon recovery
measures with water management. The tribe and Oregon Department of Fish
and Wildlife are co-managers of the fishery resources within the
Wallowa Valley and have established working relationships to manage and
enhance fishery resources.
LSubmittal of grants proposals to obtain technical data
and install flow measuring devices. These grants were obtained and
monitoring devices installed to assist in the planning, design, and
implementation of the project elements.
LImplementation of a public involvement program to involve
members of the community and participating agencies.
LCollection of engineering and scientific data on Wallowa
Lake Dam, Wallowa River, and Lostine River.
LConducted a dam safety inspection, evaluation, and
remediation evaluation.
LPreliminary evaluation of the feasibility of hydropower
generation at Wallowa Lake Dam.
LDeveloped groundwork with the affected irrigators to
develop administrative framework for executing the water exchange.
The partners have been pro-active in developing relationships with
the regulatory agencies and bringing these agencies on board as part of
the steering committee. The program is designed to address looming ESA
issues, develop solutions, and implement these solutions before
regulatory action is required.
Proactive Coordination with Other Programs
Many local, State, and Federal agencies are involved in restoration
programs within the Wallowa Valley. The Wallowa Valley has historically
supported a wide range of fisheries resource including sockeye salmon,
coho salmon, spring chinook salmon, steelhead, as well as bull trout.
Through the Steering Committee and the leadership of the partnership,
close coordination will occur with these programs. Coordination is
currently ongoing with but not limited to:
LWallowa County Salmon Restoration planning activities.
LNorthwest Oregon Hatchery Project where the Nez Perce
Tribe and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife are planning a spring
Chinook hatchery on the Lostine River.
LCoho Salmon restoration master plan led by the Nez Perce
Tribe to re-introduce coho salmon to Wallowa Lake and the Wallowa
River.
LSteelhead enhancement master plan designed to supplement
current steelhead runs on the Wallowa River and throughout the Grande
Ronde Basin.
LOregon Department of Fish and Wildlife fish screening
program designing and constructing fish screens on small irrigation
diversions.
LWatershed planning and implementation projects led by the
Grande Ronde Model Watershed.
LOregon Dam Safety requirements.
Coordination with these and other ongoing program will ensure that
measures developed and implemented as part of the Wallowa Valley
Project will be optimized and fully support other program objectives.
Achieved Visible Accomplishments
The partners have been working over the past year to develop a
framework for planning and implementation of the program. This
framework is designed with a foundation led by local Wallowa County
groups and extending to the support of State and Federal agencies. This
grass roots approach has led to a number of accomplishments.
LDevelopment of a steering committee to assist in
development and guidance of the program.
LCoordination with the Nez Perce Tribe and the Oregon
Department of Fish in Wildlife to integrate ongoing salmon recovery
measures with water management.
LSubmittal of grants proposals to obtain technical data
and install flow measuring devices.
LImplementation of a public involvement program to involve
members of the community and participating agencies.
LCollection of engineering and scientific data on Wallowa
Lake Dam, Wallowa River, and Lostine River.
LConducted a dam safety inspection, evaluation, and
remediation evaluation.
LPreliminary evaluation of the feasibility of hydropower
generation at Wallowa Lake Dam.
LDeveloped groundwork with the affected irrigators to
develop administrative framework for executing the water exchange.
These accomplishments are visible, productive, and meet the
objectives of the mission statement. The demonstrated ability to
develop and implement specific project elements has been demonstrated
and will be maintained throughout the course of the program.
Measurable Benefits
The proposed project benefits the Wallowa Valley community in many
ways. The integrated approach to the dam rehabilitation and water
management is a true ecosystem approach to resource management. Both
the citizens of the Wallowa Valley and the environment can co-exist.
Benefits to be realized by the project include:
,-- ,
Flood protection Fish protection
Water conservation Agricultural production
Potable water ESA listed salmon
supply restoration
Fish passage and Improved fish and wildlife
protection habitat
Continued Increased tourism
recreational use Economic stability
Hydropower energy
production
The Wallowa Valley economy has historically been founded in natural
resource industries, primarily agriculture and timber. Wallowa Lake Dam
has provided the irrigation water to support the agriculture
development. As with most rural communities, timber based industries
are rapidly disappearing. Tourism has become an increasingly important
component of the local economy. Wallowa Lake is the principal draw to
the area. Rehabilitation of the dam and enhancement of the fishery
restores will provide additional tourism dollars to the local economy.
The experience and knowledge gained from this project will also
serve watershed planning efforts throughout the Northwest. This program
will outline the framework and institutional requirements to implement
a true watershed approach to balancing competing demands for out water
supplies. The grass roots driven approach which anticipates and plans
for regulatory requirements, rather than reacting to regulatory
enforcement is critical to maintain economic stability and cooperative
working environments.
Summary
We strongly support the passing of bill HR 3606 authorizing the
Bureau of Reclamation to participate in the rehabilitation of the
Wallowa Lake Dam in Oregon and for other purposes. This project has its
roots in the Wallowa Valley. The local residents developed the
framework for the project to address current pressing dam safety issues
as well as anticipating future regulatory requirements. These
stakeholders have proactively formed a steering committee and invited
all interested agencies to participate and become part of the solution.
The stakeholders have a vision beyond the rehabilitation of Wallowa
Lake Dam and outlined a program which:
LAddresses pressing dam safety issues with Wallowa Lake
Dam.
LAllocates storage in the Wallowa Lake reservoir to use
for enhancing fish passage and habitat conditions in the Lostine River
and Bear Creek.
LProactively identifies fish passage improvements to
protect existing ESA listed species as well as support future re-
introduction of coho and sockeye salmon.
LAllows for incorporation of a renewable hydroelectric
power energy source.
LMaintains the agricultural economic base for the
community.
LEnhances the tourism and recreation economic expansion
within the valley.
The Steering Committee initiated the planning and coordination for
this project prior to the Klamath Falls calamity. The committee
implemented a cooperative program requesting up front coordination with
the participating agencies. The proposed project elements represent a
balance between what is physically, institutionally, and financially
feasible. This grass roots approach is the foundation to a successful
project development, implementation, and operation.
______
Mr. Walden. We have been called for legislation. We will go
for legislation and then come back for questions.
So Dr. Schnoor, you are next.
STATEMENT OF JERALD L. SCHNOOR, Ph.D., P.E., DEE, PROFESSOR,
CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, CO-DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR
GLOBAL AND REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH, THE UNIVERSITY OF
IOWA
Mr. Schnoor. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Walden,
members of the Subcommittee, Congressman Kind. Thank you for
the invitation to discuss the water quality of the Mississippi
River and H.R. 3480, the Upper Mississippi River Basin
Protection Act.
I am Jerry Schnoor, professor of environmental engineering
at the University of Iowa and a member of the National Research
Council's Water Science and Technology Board. I have prepared
remarks on the need to monitor, model and reduce nutrient and
sediment loads in the Upper Mississippi River Basin, and I ask
that the full written statement that I have provided be made a
part of the record.
Together with Congressman Kind, I co-chaired a workshop on
this subject in January 2001, sponsored by the Board of Science
and Technology Board of the NRC. I was born and reared in
Davenport, Iowa, performed research on water quality issues on
the Mississippi River and other places for over 30 years, and I
have observed the river all my life.
Permit me to tell you a fish story. When I was 10 years
old, my uncle ran a smokehouse and a small grocery store near
Muscatine, Iowa, on the banks of the Mississippi. He taught me
to fish for large white sturgeon, a strange prehistoric-looking
fish, but a true delicacy when smoked and savored.
Unfortunately, the river has changed considerably over the past
decades. It is no longer possible to catch sturgeon. They have
been largely extirpated from the river, the victims of soil
erosion, over-fertilization and wastewater discharges.
This tension between humans and the environment is neither
inevitable nor completely irreversible. We must find ways to
protect the environment, while developing a strong economy. A
healthy economy and a clean environment can go hand-in-hand, I
believe, but to do this, we must understand fully the
environment, technologies for improving it, and human social
systems.
The Upper Mississippi River Protection Act seeks to develop
a coordinated public-private approach to reducing nutrient and
sediment losses in the Upper Mississippi. It is sorely needed.
The first steps are to establish a water quality monitoring
network and mathematical models of the basic processes for
pollutant fate and transport in the river basin. By cross-
comparisons of sub-basins, it will allow scientists and
engineers to decipher what management approaches are cost-
effective in reducing sediment and nutrient loads to the river.
This is a critical need in the Nation's effort to improve water
quality, impacted to a large extent by nonpoint source runoff
from the land.
Since pre-settlement days, about 1850, land cover and land
use have changed dramatically. In Iowa, for example, my home
State, 90 percent of the land is now in agriculture. This
agriculture is the lifeblood of the economy, but we need to
find ways to harmonize it better with the environment and to
sustain quality ecosystems.
Since 1850, we have cleared about two-thirds of the forest
land, drained 95 percent of the wetlands, and replaced 99
percent of the native prairies. Such drastic change in land
cover is bound to influence water quality. Streams have become
clogged by soil erosion, critical habitat for fish spawning has
been covered, and species have been lost. Changes in land
cover, together with the introduction of locks, and dams and
channelization, have destroyed prime habitat for native aquatic
organisms.
What has gone wrong? Well, I would submit that nothing has
really gone wrong. It is simply that we are in the middle of an
ongoing effort in adaptive management. Congress recognized the
need in 1972, with the original Clean Water Act, to address
nonpoint source pollution, but monitoring data for proper
assessment and modeling purposes did not exist. Ever since
then, we have been moving toward assessment of the problem and
a new program, Total Maximum Daily Loads. This program requires
the States to perform a new waste load allocation and a load
allocation for nonpoint source pollution for the first time
with a margin of safety to recognize uncertainties.
Basinwide implementation plans will be required and new
permits will be eventually issued, a process that could take 10
to 15 years in the future. I believe that monitoring the
Nation's waters is critically underfunded in this regard, and
it slows the process. The States are most perplexed by how to
implement a program without enough data to fulfill modeling
needs and to perform defensible TMDLs. The Upper Mississippi
River Protection Act, H.R. 3480, will help to gather this data
and construct computer models for one of the most ecologically
and economically important waters in the Nation.
I strongly support this bill, and thank you for the chance
to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Schnoor follows:]
Statement of Jerald L. Schnoor, Ph.D., P.E., DEE, Professor, Civil and
Environmental Engineering, Co-Director, Center for Global and Regional
Environmental Research, The University of Iowa, and Member, Water
Science and Technology Board, National Research Council
Good morning, Chairman Calvert and members of the Subcommittee.
Thank you for the invitation to discuss water quality of the
Mississippi River and H.R. 3480, the Upper Mississippi River Basin
Protection Act. I am Jerry Schnoor, a professor of environmental
engineering at the University of Iowa and a member of the National
Research Council's (NRC) Water Science and Technology Board. The
National Research Council is the operating arm of the National Academy
of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of
Medicine, chartered by Congress in 1863 to advise the government on
matters of science and technology. I have prepared remarks on the need
to monitor, model, and reduce nutrient and sediment loads in the Upper
Mississippi River Basin. Together with Congressman Kind, I co-chaired a
Workshop on this subject in January 2001, sponsored by the Water
Science and Technology Board of the NRC. I have authored a textbook
related to this subject, Environmental Modeling: Fate and Transport of
Pollutants in Water, Air, and Soil (John Wiley and Sons, New York, 682
pp., 1996), and performed research on water quality issues for almost
30 years. I am born and reared in Davenport, Iowa, on the Mississippi
River, and I have observed the river all my life.
Permit me to tell a fish story. When I was ten years old, my uncle
ran a smoke-house and small grocery store near Muscatine, Iowa, on the
banks of the Mississippi River. He taught me to fish for large white
sturgeon, a strange prehistoric-looking fish, but a true delicacy when
smoked and savored. Unfortunately, the river has changed considerably
over the past decades. It's no longer possible to catch sturgeon--they
have been largely extirpated from the river, the victims of soil
erosion, over-fertilization, and wastewater discharges. This tension
between humans and their environment is neither inevitable nor
completely irreversible. We must find ways to protect the environment
while developing a strong economy. A healthy economy and a clean
environment can go hand-in-hand. To do this, we must understand fully
the environment, technologies for improvement, and human social
systems.
The Upper Mississippi Protection Act seeks to develop a coordinated
public-private approach to reducing nutrient and sediment losses in the
Upper Mississippi River Basin. It is sorely needed. The first steps are
to establish a water quality monitoring network and mathematical models
of the basic processes for pollutant fate and transport in the river
basin. By cross-comparisons of sub-basins, it will allow scientists and
engineers to decipher what management approaches are cost-effective in
reducing sediment and nutrient loads to the river. This is a critical
need in the nation's effort to improve water quality, impacted to a
large extent by nonpoint source runoff from the land.
Since pre-settlement days (circa 1850), land cover and land use
have changed dramatically. In Iowa, for example, 90% of the land is now
in agriculture. This agriculture is the li lood of the economy, but we
need to find ways to harmonize it better with the environment and to
sustain quality ecosystems. Since 1850, we have cleared about two-
thirds of the forestland, drained 95% of the wetlands, and replaced 99%
of the native prairies. Such drastic change in land cover is bound to
influence water quality. Streams have become clogged by soil erosion,
critical habitat for fish spawning has been covered, and species have
been lost. Changes in land cover, together with the introduction of
locks and dams and channelization, have destroyed prime habitat for
native aquatic organisms.
In 1972, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act),
P.L. 92-500, sought a goal of ``swimmable and fishable'' waters. After
spending billions of dollars each year, the nation has benefited
significantly from secondary treatment of point source discharges
(municipal and industrial wastewater treatment). The Act established
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) in which
approximately 70,000 permits have been issued to enforce water quality
standards. Water quality of the nation's inland waters improved greatly
during the next 20 years. Unfortunately, those improvements have, for
the most part, run their course, and we are still short of our goal. In
the U.S., we have 21,000 waters that are not expected to meet their
intended uses, even with permitted discharges. Many of these stream and
lake segments are in the Upper Mississippi River Basin, primarily
impacted by sediments, nutrients and fecal coliform bacteria. What went
wrong?
Nothing really went wrong. It is simply an ongoing effort in
adaptive management. Congress recognized the need in 1972 to address
nonpoint source pollution, but monitoring data for proper assessment
and modeling purposes did not exist. Ever since then, we have been
moving towards assessment of the problem and a new program, Total
Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL). This program requires the states to perform
a new waste load allocation and a load allocation for nonpoint source
pollution with a margin- of-safety to recognize uncertainties. Basin-
wide implementation plans will be required and new permits will
eventually be issued, a process that may take 10-15 years. I believe
monitoring of the nation's waters is critically under-funded and slows
this process--the states are perplexed by how to implement a program
without enough data to fulfill modeling needs and perform defensible
TMDLs. The Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act will help to
gather this data and construct computer models for one of the most
ecologically and economically important waters in the nation.
Trends in water quality of the Upper Mississippi River over the
past 30 years are difficult to delineate with so little data, but some
general observations can be stated. Nitrate concentrations are getting
worse in some highly agricultural areas, probably due to increased
applications of nitrogen fertilizers. Fertilizers are applied at
application rates larger than the crops can assimilate, and the result
is runoff of nitrogen valued at more than $300 million per year. The
trend towards greater density of animals in concentrated animal feeding
operations (CAFOs) is also accelerating. It is difficult for operators
to apply manure onto the land in an acceptable manner when the density
of animals and sheer volume of the manure becomes so great. On the
other hand, conservation tillage practices on farms have really taken
hold, and there is some evidence that suspended solids (silt) and total
phosphorus concentrations may be decreasing (improving).
That the Upper Mississippi River still fails to meet the goals of
the Clean Water Act and its intended uses is undeniable. Spawning areas
are covered with silt by soil erosion, nitrate concentrations exceed
drinking water standards in many locations, bathing beaches are closed
due to fecal coliform bacteria in the water, and algae choke many
waterways due to eutrophication (the excessive rate of addition of
nutrients). Furthermore, the problems are multiplied by the transport
of sediments and nutrients downstream, creating a conundrum for the
Gulf of Mexico.
``Gulf Hypoxia'' refers to a zone of low dissolved oxygen in the
Gulf of Mexico that has grown to 12-17,000 square kilometers since
1985, roughly the size of Massachusetts. It is probably caused by the
build-up of nutrients in sediments from algal blooms over the past 50
years or so. Remember, we said that the nation's inland waters had, for
the most part, improved during the period 1972-1990s because of the
Clean Water Act and its amendments. But our nation's coastal waters
have not improved similarly. We do not understand fully why, but it
seems there is a time lag associated with sediment anoxia that has
grown steadily worse due to development of coastal zones and the
cumulative build-up of nutrients and silt from riverine transport.
Thus, the problems in the Gulf of Mexico are, to a large extent, the
problems of the Upper Mississippi River Basin transported downstream.
It is thought that about 31% of the nutrient loadings to the Gulf come
from the Upper Mississippi River Basin alone, mainly from agricultural
runoff. Although it is difficult to document damages in the Gulf at the
present time, continued growth of the hypoxic zone will eventually
result in the loss of important fisheries.
Economic impacts already can be documented in the Upper Mississippi
River Basin. Dredging of sediments in the navigation channel costs over
$100 million each year. Farmers lose more than $300 million annually in
nitrogen fertilizer runoff, and the loss of aquatic habitat and beach
closings threatens the river's $1.2 billion recreation and $6.6 billion
tourism industries. The fishing industry, both commercial and
recreational, has changed substantially in the past 50 years, but it is
difficult to allocate damages among the many causes of soil erosion,
agricultural runoff, municipal and industrial wastewater discharges,
over-fishing, and invasive species. Invasive species are one of the
thorniest problems nation-wide, a serious by-product of global
commerce. Zebra mussels, Dreissena polymorpha, were introduced by
ballast water to the Great Lakes in 1986. They entered the Upper
Mississippi River Basin a few years later, clogging water intake
structures and out-competing native mussels for habitat. So far, costs
of control and eradication have exceeded $138 million. They are not the
only problems: several carp species including grass, bighead, silver
and black carp have all been introduced since the 1970s by aquaculture.
Perhaps the largest data gap and the greatest motivation for H.R.
3480 are to evaluate Best Management Practices (BMPs). BMPs refer to
those management practices that could ameliorate agricultural runoff
and reduce its impact on lakes and rivers. They include conservation
tillage, grass stripping, riparian zone buffer strips, contour plowing
and terracing, and wetlands restoration. There is a ``disconnect''--
while most scientists believe that BMPs are what is needed to solve the
problem of nonpoint pollution, they have precious little data to prove
it. Some BMP practices are already in place, and a coordinated public-
private program of monitoring and modeling could help to analyze their
effectiveness. Local, state, and Federal water quality monitoring and
modeling efforts need to be joined to obtain a comprehensive picture.
Eventually we will need to control nonpoint sources of pollution in the
most cost-effective manner. We are embarking on a massive undertaking,
but Americans deserve nothing less than clean water for drinking,
fishing, contact recreation, and beautiful, functioning ecosystems.
One mantra in business is, ``If we can measure it, we can manage
it. If we can manage it, we should be able to improve it.'' That is the
impetus for the Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act. It should
be accomplished by the highest qualified professionals, subjected to
rigorous peer review, and results should be published in the freely
available literature. I believe that H.R. 3480 provides such a study.
It addresses a very serious national problem, protection of water
quality and a natural resource treasure.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to discuss these issues. I
would be happy to try to answer any questions you may have.
______
Mr. Walden. Thank you, Doctor.
We are getting called for a vote, but we will go ahead and
take two more panelists. We can get this done in about 5
minutes, and that should give Mr. Kind and I time to sprint
over and vote, and then come back.
So let us go now to Doug Daigle, I believe.
Mr. Daigle, welcome.
STATEMENT OF DOUG DAIGLE, HYPOXIA PROGRAM DIRECTOR, MISSISSIPPI
RIVER BASIN ALLIANCE
Mr. Daigle. Thank you. My name is Doug Daigle. Mr. Chairman
and members of the Subcommittee, I welcome the opportunity to
speak with you about Bill H.R. 3480, the Upper Mississippi
River Protection Act, authorized by Representative Kind.
This bill is of particular interest to the organization
that I represent because it will help address one of the key
issues that we are dealing with. It is an issue of national
concern as well, which is nutrient pollution of the river and
the growth of hypoxia in the northern Gulf of Mexico.
The Mississippi River Basin Alliance is a nonprofit
organization, and it has got over 150 member groups along the
entire length of the river, and we have a real diverse
membership, shrimpers on the Gulf, farmers in the Midwest. The
mission is really to protect and restore the health of the
river system and the communities who depend on it, and the
organization was founded on the premise that the Mississippi
River Basin, though large, is really one system, and its
problems need to be addressed in a basin-like context.
That is why we adopted the issue of Gulf hypoxia as one of
our key issues of concern. The concerns about the impacts of
hypoxia on the most productive fisheries in the lower 48 States
led to the problem being addressed at the highest levels of the
U.S. Government, and the White House Office of Science and
Technology initiated an integrated assessment of hypoxia. There
was the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control
Act of 1998, mandating a task force made up of Federal agencies
with jurisdiction and key States along the river to deal with
the problem, and they came up with an action plan.
The action plan called for reducing the frequency, the
duration, the size and degree of oxygen depletion in the Gulf.
It provided a basinwide context for doing that and relies on
incentive-based voluntary efforts for nonpoint sources of
nitrogen loading, and the existing regulatory controls for
point sources, but it does more than that because it makes
clear that the efforts to reduce Gulf hypoxia will also deliver
improvements to water quality throughout the basin and that
there is really a reciprocal relationship there, and I will
quote briefly from the action plan.
``While the primary focus of this strategy is on reducing
nitrogen loads to the northern Gulf, many of the actions
proposed through this plan will also achieve basinwide
improvements in surface water quality. Likewise, actions taken
to address local water quality problems in the basin will
frequently also contribute to reductions in nitrogen loadings
to the Gulf.''
So this brings us to the importance of H.R. 3480. The
action plan identifies priorities of research and monitoring
necessary to support its goals, and it has a framework of
adaptive management, based on implementation, monitoring and
research, so they could address known problems, clarify
scientific uncertainties and evaluate the effectiveness of the
efforts to reduce hypoxia.
The expanded monitoring network for sediment and nutrient
loss in the Upper Mississippi River Basin proposed by H.R. 3480
has the potential to significantly aid and complement
implementation of the Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan with the upper
river, and it also is going to help us by integrating data from
all sources, and the consultation and collaboration with other
public and private monitoring efforts that it has called for
are going to be a tremendous aid as well.
We want to discuss this bill today. We should recognize, as
well, as we discuss it, we would be remiss if we didn't
recognize some other events that could affect its success and
the success of the action plan and that measure. The proposed
budget reductions for Fiscal Year 2003 for the U.S. Geological
Survey would negatively impact water data collection, water
quality research and assessments, and university-based
education and research-related water systems.
As our discussions about 3480 illustrate today, these
proposed reductions are really shortsighted. The work of the
USGS is too important and our need for it is too great to
really trade that all for some short-term fiscal gain from
reducing the budgets of those programs.
A couple of weeks ago, the Gulf Hypoxia Task Force met in
St. Louis, a very constructive meeting. They are willing to
work, but they need funding, and this type of bill is just the
type of measure that could help bring success to their efforts
and to similar efforts throughout the basin.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Daigle follows:]
Statement of Doug Daigle, Hypoxia Program Director, Mississippi River
Basin Alliance, on H.R. 3480
Dear Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee,
I welcome the opportunity to speak to you regarding the bill H.R.
3480, the ``Upper Mississippi River Protection Act'', authored by
Representative Ron Kind of Wisconsin. This bill is of particular
interest to the organization I represent, the Mississippi River Basin
Alliance (MRBA), because it will help to address one of our key issues
of concern, as well as a major problem facing the basin and the
country, which is nutrient pollution in the river system and growth of
hypoxia in the northern Gulf of Mexico.
MRBA is a non-profit organization with over 130 member groups along
the length of the river. Our main office is in Minneapolis, and
regional offices are located in St. Louis and New Orleans. The mission
of MRBA is to protect and restore the health of the river system and
the communities who depend on it. The founding of the organization was
premised on the realization that the Mississippi River, though large,
was one system and that its problems needed to be addressed in a basin-
wide context.
MRBA adopted the hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico as one of its
key issues for just this reason. A substantial body of scientific
research has described the process by which this zone of low oxygen
manifests itself in Louisiana's coastal waters. 1 The
occurrence of the hypoxic zone is a result of interactions of nutrients
such as nitrogen carried by the Mississippi River, channelization of
the river and loss of riverine wetlands in the basin, and the
stratification of fresh and salt water layers in the Gulf. Over half of
the nitrate load in the Mississippi enters above its confluence with
the Ohio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Integrated Assessment of Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of
Mexico, May 2000. National Science and Technology Council Committee on
Environment and Natural Resources, Washington, DC; also see Rabalais,
Turner, and Scavia, ``Beyond Science into Policy: Gulf of Mexico
Hypoxia and the Mississippi River,'' Bioscience Vol. 52, no. 2,
February 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The highest nitrogen loads enter the river from basins in the upper
Midwest. The majority of the nitrogen is believed to come from non-
point sources, such as agricultural runoff, although municipal and
industrial wastewater and (to a lesser extent) atmospheric deposition
of nitrates from fossil fuel combustion also make a contribution.
A simplified description of the process by which hypoxia forms off
Louisiana's coast would run as follows: extensive nutrient loading from
the Mississippi and Atchafalaya Rivers fuels the growth of large algal
blooms offshore. As the algae dies and sinks through the water column,
its decomposition leads to the depletion of oxygen, primarily in the
lower, saltier layer of water. As oxygen levels drop below 2 milligrams
per liter, marine life is unable to survive. Mobile organisms such as
fish and shrimp migrate out of the hypoxic area if they can, while
benthic (bottom-dwelling) organisms die off. Since systematic
scientific mapping of the Gulf hypoxic zone began in 1985, the size
that it can attain has more than doubled, from roughly 4000 square
miles in 1991 to 8000 square miles in the summer of 2001. 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Dr. Nancy Rabelais, Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium,
Press release, July 26, 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concerns about the growth of this hypoxic zone, one of the largest
in the world, center around its effects on the Gulf ecosystem, which
sustains the most productive fishery in the lower 48 states. The rich
fisheries off Louisiana's coast are in an already precarious position
because of the dramatic ongoing loss of the state's coastal wetlands.
As coastal marshes erode and break up, they dispense large amounts of
detritus into the water, which fuel higher populations and harvests of
fish and shrimp, but on a one-time basis. At some point, the loss of
marsh habitat, so vital for the life-cycles of estuarine seafood, will
lead to a sharp decline in those populations and the harvest levels.
3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For information on Louisiana's coastal crisis and restoration
program, see Coast 2050: Towards a Sustainable Coastal Louisiana,
Coastal Wetlands Conservation Task Force (www.lacoast.gov)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These concerns led to the hypoxia issue being addressed at the
highest levels of the U.S. government. Under the Clinton
administration, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy
initiated the Integrated Assessment of Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of
Mexico (completed in 2000), and with the additional mandate provided by
the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998
4, the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient
Task Force (hereafter referred to as the ``Task Force'') convened
representatives of jurisdictional Federal agencies and the governments
of states along the river to create an action plan to reduce the growth
of hypoxia in the Gulf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Title VI of Public Law 105-383, section 604 (b), November 13,
1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Task Force worked for two years in an often contentious
atmosphere, since farm states in the Midwest were understandably
concerned about the potential economic impacts on their agricultural
sectors of remedies to reduce Gulf hypoxia. As someone who participated
in the process as an observer and public commenter, I can say that it
was a significant learning experience for all involved. At the end of
that process, the Task Force fulfilled its charge and reached consensus
on a plan.
The Action Plan for Reducing, Mitigating, and Controlling Hypoxia
in the Northern Gulf of Mexico (hereafter referred to as the ``Action
Plan'') lays out a national strategy to reduce ``the frequency,
duration, size, and degree of oxygen depletion'' of the hypoxic zone.
5 The Action Plan provides a basin-wide context for
achieving this goal, relying on incentive-based, voluntary efforts for
non-point sources of nitrogen loading, and existing regulatory controls
for point sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The Action Plan can be viewed at www.epa.gov/msbasin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet it does more than that. The Action Plan also makes clear that
efforts to reduce Gulf hypoxia will deliver improvements to water
quality throughout the basin:
``water quality throughout the Mississippi [river basin] has
been degraded by excess nutrients. Most states in the basin
have significant river miles impaired by high nutrient
concentrations, primarily phosphorus [and] excess nitrate,
which can be a human health hazard.'' 6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Action Plan, p. 7.
``While the primary focus of this strategy is on reducing
nitrogen loads to the northern Gulf, many of the actions
proposed through this plan will also achieve basinwide
improvements in surface-water quality'' Likewise, actions taken
to address local water quality problems in the basin will
frequently also contribute to reductions in nitrogen loadings
to the Gulf.'' 7
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Action Plan, p.8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This brings us to the importance of H.R. 3480, the ``Upper
Mississippi River Protection Act'' introduced by Representative Kind.
The Action Plan identifies as priorities the research and monitoring
necessary to support its goals. Its approach of adaptive management is
based on ``implementation, monitoring, and research, to address known
problems, clarify scientific uncertainties, and evaluate the
effectiveness of efforts to reduce hypoxia.'' 8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Ibid., p.4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The expanded monitoring network for sediment and nutrient loss in
the Upper Mississippi River Basin proposed by H.R. 3480 has the
potential to significantly aid and complement implementation of the
Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan in that region. In particular, H.R. 3480 could
aid the Task Force in carrying out one of the actions called for in the
Plan for this year:
``By Spring 2002, States, Tribes, and Federal agencies within
the Mississippi and Atchafalaya River Basins will expand the
existing monitoring efforts within the Basin to provide both a
coarse resolution assessment of the nutrient contribution of
various sub-basins and a high resolution modeling technique in
these smaller watersheds to identify additional management
actions to help mitigate nitrogen losses to the Gulf and
nutrient loadings to local waters.'' 9
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Ibib., p.13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expanded monitoring programs throughout the basin are critical as
well to the ongoing effort to reduce Gulf hypoxia (and to improve state
and local water quality):
``Effective implementation of [the Action Plan] will require a
monitoring strategy that measures progress towards achieving
both long-term and short-term goals. Feedback from such a
monitoring strategy will facilitate an adaptive management
framework that enables continual improvement of the Action Plan
with increasing knowledge of the factors and processes
controlling nutrient losses, their effects...and the
effectiveness of management actions.'' 10
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Ibid., p.23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These considerations make clear the importance of the integration
of data from all sources, and the consultation and collaboration with
other public and private monitoring efforts called for in Sections 103
and 104 of H.R. 3480. 11 Just as critical is the integration
of data into modeling and research, as called for in Title II, Sections
201, 202, and 203 of H.R. 3480. Again, there is significant potential
for aiding and complementing implementation of the Gulf Hypoxia Action
Plan, while accurately gauging the effectiveness of water quality
improvements in the Upper Mississippi River Basin:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Section 103 (a), (b), (c), (d), and Section 104, respectively,
H.R. 3480.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
``[The Action Plan] strategy must quantify environmental trends
and include periodic data analysis, interpretation, and
reporting to all stakeholders that are involved with design and
implementation of management, remediation, and restoration
actions...Analysis and interpretation must use models that
integrate knowledge across scales and hydrologic compartments
from the smallest watersheds to the Mississippi and Atchafalaya
River Basins and the Gulf of Mexico.'' 12
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Action Plan, p.25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While we discuss today the opportunities provided by the Action
Plan and H.R. 3480, we would be remiss not to bring into focus other
issues that could affect the success of those and similar efforts. The
President's proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2003 envisions significant
reductions to the budget of the U.S. Geological Survey. Proposed
reductions to funding for USGS Water Programs would negatively impact
water data collection, water quality research and assessments, and
university-based education and research related to water systems.
As our discussions today demonstrate so clearly, these proposed
reductions are ill-advised and short-sighted. The work of the USGS and
the pressing need for timely data and ``sound science'' dwarf whatever
small fiscal gains might be achieved by cutting those programs, and are
far too important to relegate to some unspecified future date. We need
them now, today, and in the future.
The Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan was submitted to Congress in January
of 2001. The change of administrations and the turnover of top-level
agency participants on the Task Force led to virtually no action on
implementation being taken during most of 2001. The Task Force
reconvened on February 7-8, 2002 in St. Louis for a constructive and
positive meeting at which they reiterated the common ground they had
attained and the resolve to act. Unfortunately, the challenge facing
them has grown significantly. The funding situation at the Federal
level is far more complicated than it was a year ago, and most states
face budgets that are becoming progressively tighter.
The Task Force will need to be creative and persistent in its
efforts, and they will need the help of stakeholders as well as state
and Federal Governments.
The Mississippi River Basin Alliance is committed to progress on
the problem of hypoxia, and to cooperation throughout the basin on
issues that affect the future of the river and the many people who
depend on it, from farmers in the Midwest to shrimpers on the Louisiana
coast.
One of several hopeful notes at the recent St. Louis meeting came
from a number of presentations that were made to the Task Force about
innovative strategies for nutrient management, wetland restoration, and
on-farm conservation. 13 There is no shortage of new ideas
coming from universities, non-governmental organizations, and farmers,
but all of them will require monitoring and modeling efforts to gauge
both their effectiveness and how our limited resources can best be
spent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ These included Dr. Donald Hey of the Wetlands Initiative in
Chicago, Dr. Suzie Greenhalgh of World Resources Institute, and Dr.s
John Day and Bill Mitsch of Louisiana and Ohio State Universities,
respectively. For a summary of the ``suite'' of actions available to
address hypoxia, see the Action Plan as well as ``Reducing Nitrogen
Loading to the Gulf of Mexico from the Mississippi River Basin:
Strategies to Counter a Persistent Ecological Problem,'' Mitsch, et.al,
Bioscience Vol. 52, No. 5, May 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Collaboration and coordination will be essential not only to
progress on implementation of the Action Plan and reduction of Gulf
hypoxia, but to improvement of water quality throughout the basin. One
of the most exciting things about the Action Plan is that it provides a
context for the beginning of basin-wide cooperation among states in the
Mississippi Valley. H.R. 3480 can be an important part of this wider
effort. This is a significant opportunity that should be grasped.
______
Mr. Walden. Thank you very much.
Now we will hear from Ms. Holly Stoerker. Ms. Stoerker,
thank you for being here. We welcome your testimony.
STATEMENT OF HOLLY STOERKER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, UPPER
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN ASSOCIATION
Ms. Stoerker. Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of Subcommittee. My
name is Holly Stoerker, and I am the executive director of the
Upper Mississippi River Basin Association, which is an
organization that was formed 20 years ago by the Governors of
the States that border the upper river, and those would include
Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Iowa, and Missouri.
I would certainly like to thank Representative Ron Kind for
his leadership in addressing this very important issue of
sediment and nutrients on our basin. I think it has been
probably 30 years' worth of reports that I have read about our
basin, and every single one of them lists sedimentation as the
single most important problem.
And so in recognition of that, which is both an
environmental problem because it fills in backwater areas on
our river, but it is also an economic problem because the Corps
of Engineers has to dredge a channel for commercial navigation
and get that sediment out of there, so we have an economic and
an environmental problem.
And as Doug Daigle pointed out, we also have an
environmental problem in the Gulf of Mexico with regard to
hypoxia, which is, in large part, caused by nutrients from the
Mississippi River Basin.
I am here today on behalf of the States of this basin with
a very simple message, and that is that we need what H.R. 3480
is seeking to do; in particular, an integrated monitoring
network, under the leadership of the U.S. Geological Survey, to
monitor nutrients and sediments in our basin.
We need this for a number of reasons. We need to target our
investments in our basin, our investments in land conservation,
in water quality efforts, and wetlands protection, and to do
that we need good, sound science. And then we need this kind of
monitoring system so that we can figure out whether those
investments have really made a difference over time, and we are
only going to know that if we keep track of that over time.
At this point, I would like to simply reemphasize the
letter that Representative Kind introduced into the record from
six Governors. This was a letter last October that--a
tripartisan letter, I should emphasize--from last October that
the Governors sent to Bush administration officials, declaring
their support for the actions recommended in the Hypoxia Action
Plan, and, in particular, as Mr. Kind pointed out, they do, in
fact, call for ``a monitoring effort conducted jointly by the
U.S. Geological Survey and the States.'' Well, I guess, in my
view, that is exactly what H.R. 3480 is, in fact, seeking to
do.
Our organization has testified twice now. This will be the
third time on this bill, previous versions, including an
appearance 2 years ago before this Subcommittee, and while the
bill has undergone a number of changes over this period of
time, I think we really do have a very sound piece of
legislation here and one which I would encourage this
Subcommittee to endorse and move quickly to the House Floor.
Our written testimony, which I guess I assume will be
included in the record--
Mr. Walden. Yes, it will.
Ms. Stoerker. --makes a number of points, specific points,
about the bill, most of which simply set forth the States'
expectations and assumptions, frankly, about how this kind of a
program would be implemented, given the expectation that we are
going to be able to move it forward.
I will let you just simply reflect on those specific points
at your leisure, but before I close, I do want to make one very
important point, and it is one that I think my colleagues here
at the table have already made, which is that establishing a
new USGS monitoring and modeling program in our basin should
not come at the expense of existing programs and funding.
For example, we cannot assess nutrient and sediment
transport in our rivers and streams unless we have good flow
data. And the USGS Fiscal Year 2003 budget calls for a
reduction of $2.1 million in the National Streamflow
Information Program, which is going to result nationwide in 129
stream gauges being lost, nine of which are in our basin.
Similarly, the cuts to the Toxic Substances Hydrology Program,
where we are doing current nutrient research, is particularly
devastating.
So I would urge this Committee to also help us on that
front to maintain the good work that the U.S. Geological Survey
is already doing.
And so with that, I will close. Thank you again, and I
certainly underscore our members' strong support for this bill.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Stoerker follows:]
Statement of Holly Stoerker, Executive Director, Upper Mississippi
River Basin Association
Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Calvert and Members of the
Subcommittee, for this opportunity to appear before you. My name is
Holly Stoerker and I am Executive Director of the Upper Mississippi
River Basin Association (UMRBA). The Governors of Illinois, Iowa,
Minnesota, Missouri and Wisconsin formed the UMRBA in 1981 to
coordinate the state agencies' river-related programs and policies and
to work with Federal agencies on regional issues. On behalf of our
member states, I am quite pleased to offer the following comments
regarding the Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act (H.R. 3480).
Overview
The Upper Mississippi River Basin Association (UMRBA) is a strong
supporter of efforts to reduce sediment and nutrients in the basin. As
such, the UMRBA enthusiastically supports the Upper Mississippi River
Basin Protection Act (H.R. 3480).
The UMRBA applauds the leadership of Representative Ron Kind and
the Upper Mississippi River Congressional Task Force in addressing
water resource needs in the basin and their commitment to providing
sound scientific data upon which to make water resource management
decisions. The UMRBA has worked closely with the sponsors of H.R. 3480
on previous versions of the legislation including H.R. 4013 in the
106th Congress and H.R. 1800 in the 107th Congress. While H.R 3480 is
narrower in scope than its predecessors, it is significantly improved.
In large part, these improvements are the result of Representative Ron
Kinds' willingness to work closely with state and Federal water
management agencies, as well as stakeholders in the basin.
The Importance of Monitoring and Modeling
Both sediment and nutrients have a profound affect on the quality
of lakes, rivers, and streams throughout the Upper Mississippi River
Basin. Sediment fills in valuable wetlands and streams throughout the
basin, as well as the unique backwater habitats and navigation channel
of the Mississippi River. Excess nutrients degrade water quality,
impairing rivers and streams and threatening ground water supplies. In
addition, excess nutrients from the Mississippi River Basin have been
linked to oxygen depletion in the Gulf of Mexico, resulting in what is
known as Gulf hypoxia. Meeting these challenges will require
significantly enhancing our understanding of sediment and nutrient
sources, mobilization, and transport. The monitoring and modeling
program authorized in H.R. 3480 is not a scientific luxury; it is a
management imperative. The data and information that results from these
efforts will help guide Federal, state, and local programs designed to
solve the very real problems of water quality and habitat degradation.
Targeting our efforts to restore wetlands, reduce nonpoint pollution,
and help agricultural producers apply best management practices,
depends on good scientific data.
The need for enhanced sediment and nutrient monitoring in the Upper
Mississippi River Basin is widely recognized. In the January 2001
``Action Plan for Reducing, Mitigating, and Controlling Hypoxia in the
Northern Gulf of Mexico,'' state and Federal agencies participating in
the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force
called for ``increasing the scale and frequency of monitoring of both
the extent of the hypoxic zone and the sources of nutrients and
conditions of waters throughout the basin.'' In an October 23, 2001
letter to Bush Administration officials, six Governors of Mississippi
River Basin states urged that Federal programs to reduce nutrient
inputs be enhanced. In this regard, the Governors state that a
``monitoring effort conducted jointly by the U.S. Geological Survey and
the states is required within the basin to determine the water quality
effects of the actions taken and to measure the success of efforts on a
sub-basin and project level.'' H.R. 3480 reflects just the type of
increased monitoring effort that has been proposed by both the Task
Force and the Governors.
Specific Comments on H.R. 3480
LSediment and Nutrient Monitoring Differences--The
monitoring network and modeling efforts described in H.R. 3480 are
designed to address both sediment and nutrients. However, the sources,
transport, delivery, and impacts of sediment and nutrients are not
identical and will require different monitoring and modeling
approaches. Moreover, there are natural baseline levels of sediment and
nutrients that would occur without human activity. For many waterbodies
in the basin, acceptable levels of sediment and nutrient impairment
have not been identified. While it may not be necessary for the
legislation to explicitly acknowledge or accommodate these
considerations, they will be critical in the design of the monitoring
network and in development of the models. In part, this is why Section
104 of the bill is a key provision. Section 104 requires that USGS
collaborate with other Federal agencies, states, tribes, local units of
government, and private interests in establishing the monitoring
network. Such collaboration should help ensure that the design of the
monitoring network yields data that is relevant to both sediment and
nutrient management issues.
LRelationship to Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico
Watershed Nutrient Task Force--The Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico
Watershed Nutrient Task Force is the joint Federal/state body that
developed the Hypoxia Action Plan published in January 2001. At its
most recent meeting on February 8, 2002, the Task Force's Coordination
Committee agreed to work with USGS to establish a ``framework'' for
nutrient monitoring in the Mississippi River watershed and Gulf of
Mexico. That framework is to be presented to the Task Force at its next
meeting in August 2002. It is our expectation that the monitoring
network authorized in H.R. 3480 be designed and implemented consistent
with the framework already under development by the Task Force.
LCost-Sharing--The states are pleased that the cost-
sharing requirements in Section 105 provide that up to 80 percent of
the nonfederal share may be provided through in-kind contributions and
that existing state and local monitoring efforts may be applied to the
nonfederal share. Given the geographic scope of the basin and the
complex array of potential nonfederal partners, aggregating
contributions to ensure compliance with the bill's cost sharing
requirements would seem to pose significant challenges. Nevertheless,
it is significant that H.R. 3480 recognizes the value of state and
local monitoring.
LAdditional New Funding--Section 301 of H.R. 3480
authorizes annual appropriations of $6.25 million for this new
monitoring and modeling effort. It will be imperative that this funding
represent additional new resources rather than a redirection of
existing resources. H.R. 3480 emphasizes integration of existing
monitoring efforts and use of existing data, a strategy that will
certainly help to leverage scarce resources. However, integration of
existing efforts is not a substitute for a real increase in the level
of effort. And most importantly, this increased effort must not come at
the expense of other important USGS programs such as the National Water
Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA) or the National Streamflow
Information Program (NSIP). In particular, streamgaging supported by
NSIP provides flow data that will be critical to successfully
monitoring and modeling sediment and nutrient loads. We cannot afford
to lose any of that streamflow data, and in fact will likely need to
increase flow monitoring. It is particularly troubling that, in fact,
the President's Fiscal Year 03 budget proposes deep cuts to existing
monitoring efforts in the basin, including current USGS water programs,
as well as the Corps of Engineers' Upper Mississippi River
Environmental Management Program. Such cuts will severely limit USGS'
ability to undertake the new monitoring responsibilities proposed in
H.R. 3480.
LNational Research Council Assessment--Section 107 of H.R.
3480 directs the National Research Council of the Academy of Sciences
to conduct a ``comprehensive water resources assessment of the Upper
Mississippi River Basin.'' In the context of this legislation, it is
our assumption that such an assessment would be focused on the specific
water quality issues associated with sediment and nutrients. As such,
it would potentially provide important input to the scoping and
implementation of the monitoring and modeling authorized in H.R. 3480.
______
Mr. Walden. Thank you for your testimony. The Committee
will go into recess at this point until after our votes. We
have a motion on a previous question, which tells me we will
probably have another one right after that, so it may be 15 or
20 minutes before we are back. So we will be back, and we look
forward to this line of testimony and then question and
answers.
Thank you. We are in recess.
[Recess.]
Mr. Walden. I would like to bring the Subcommittee back to
order. We will conclude this morning's hearing with our final
witness, Dr. John McLachlan.
My colleague, Mr. Kind, is on his way back, so please go
ahead.
STATEMENT OF JOHN A. McLACHLAN, Ph.D., WEATHERHEAD
DISTINGUISHED PROFESSOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, PROFESSOR OF
PHARMACOLOGY, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR BIOENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH,
TULANE AND XAVIER UNIVERSITIES
Mr. McLachlan. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Dr. John
McLachlan, the Weatherhead distinguished professor of
environmental studies at Tulane University and director of the
Center for Bioenvironmental Research at Tulane and Xavier
Universities in New Orleans, and we are the founding partner of
the Long-Term Estuary Assessment Group, which ``acronymsially''
we call LEAG.
Our Center was founded in 1989 and is a New Orleans-based
scientific research and educational partnership between Tulane
and Xavier Universities, focusing on environmental and public
health issues, with particular emphasis on the lower
Mississippi River and the Gulf of Mexico.
In 1999, we teamed with the Navy Office of Oceanographic
Research, the Office of Naval Research, the USGS and a variety
of other academic and private organizations to form the Long-
Term Estuary Assessment Group. The purpose is to seek better
understanding of the complex Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico
estuary system and its resources.
I am here as a representative of just a poor Southern
State, and the poorest of the poor, at the very end of the line
of the river, but we just want to make sure that researchers
and people living in this region, that the down-river aspects
and perspectives are put into H.R. 3480.
So we would like to just thank you sincerely for giving us
the opportunity to provide these down-river perspectives and to
make the point that we think that any of the Upper Mississippi
deliberations should be done by involving and having the
participation of the Lower Mississippi River Basin.
We support, as a group, the H.R. 3480. The bill promotes
scientific efforts to manage sediment and nutrient loss in the
Upper Mississippi River, with the eventual goal of reducing
this load on the river. These efforts are good for both the
Upper and Lower Mississippi and for the Nation. From a lower
river perspective, we note the following advantages of H.R.
3480:
First, the ``dead zone.'' Under natural circumstances, the
Mississippi River delivers nutrients to the Gulf of Mexico,
which stimulate the biological production upon which Gulf
fisheries depend. Excess nutrients, namely, nitrogen
fertilizers, enable algae growth in the Gulf to grow to
dangerous levels. We support the efforts of H.R. 3480 to reduce
the nutrients in the river.
Secondly, in terms of dredging, under natural conditions,
sediments are deposited upon Southern Louisiana during periodic
floods at the river's mouth. With the construction of flood
control levees, such sediment now accumulates in the river.
H.R. 3480 seeks to monitor and eventually reduce sediment load,
and we applaud this.
Third, nonpoint-source pollution. A reduction of sediments
and nutrients in the Upper Mississippi has the parallel benefit
of reducing the quantity of agricultural, chemical, household
pollutants, urban runoff and bacteria reaching the river. Less
sediment means fewer particles to which these contaminants can
bind. These are all benefits to the Lower Mississippi region.
From the lower river perspective, we view the impact of
H.R. 3480 as primarily beneficial. We offer a few caveats, not
as problems with the bill, but as suggestions which recognize
the connection of the entire river system.
First, what is the optimal level of nutrients for the Gulf?
Further research toward understanding the optimal level of
nutrients reaching the Gulf of Mexico, so as not to create or
maintain a ``dead zone,'' can help us set realistic targets in
reducing nutrients in the Upper Mississippi.
Second, sediment flux. Our understanding of sediment flux
in the Lower Mississippi, a river highly controlled by men and
artificial means, will be affected by changes in sediment
runoff in the upper river. Correlating the lower river's fluxes
in sediment and death with changes in the upper river's
sediment load can aid in our understanding of how this
critically important natural feature functions.
Third, invasive species. Over a decade ago, zebra mussels
from the Caspian Sea arrived in North America via ballast water
dumped by ships in the Great Lakes region. Since then this
species has invaded the entire Mississippi River and are on
their way to New Orleans, causing significant damage to
utilities and industrial facilities. We see the Mississippi as
a pathway for biological pollutants, both up and down river,
and one that can be costly, as costly as excess nutrients and
sediment.
Fourth, the impact of this bill on Louisiana's Freshwater
Diversion Projects. To reverse saltwater intrusion and coastal
erosion, Federal and State agencies have constructed several
costly freshwater diversion projects along the lower river. We
suggest that H.R. 3480 provide for scientific assessments of
the impact of reduced sediment and nutrient loads on these
freshwater diversions.
Finally, we would propose in our support of the bill that
our position on the Mississippi in New Orleans offers a unique
perspective on the connection of the entire river system, and
we literally live on the land that has been eroded from the
upper basin and drink the water drained from it.
In this regard, we note for the Subcommittee that our
Center is currently creating a National Center for the
Mississippi River in New Orleans and is actively in partnership
with numerous up-river organizations. In this spirit, we
suggest including in H.R. 3480 a Mississippi River Summit to be
held in our nascent National Center for the Mississippi River
in New Orleans to coordinate research and activities on both
the Upper and the Lower Mississippi Basin.
Thank you very much. I am happy to take questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McLachlan follows:]
Statement of Dr. John McLachlan, Director of the Center for
Bioenvironmental Research, Tulane and Xavier Universities
Introduction
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Dr. John
McLachlan, Director of the Center for Bioenvironmental Research (CBR)
at Tulane and Xavier Universities in New Orleans, Louisiana, and
founding partner of the Long-Term Estuary Assessment Group (LEAG).
Background of CBR and LEAG
Founded in 1989, the CBR is a New Orleans-based scientific research
and education partnership between Tulane and Xavier Universities,
focusing on environmental and public health issues with a particular
emphasis on the lower Mississippi River region. The CBR specializes in
researching the ecological and human-health impact of chemical
pollutants, environmental and geological conditions of the lower
Mississippi River and Gulf of Mexico, environmental signals and
sensors, and related issues such as biosensor technology, invasive
species, long-term stewardship of contained pollutants, and information
technology for environmental management. World renowned for its
progressive, multidisciplinary research on aquatic ecosystems, the CBR
has a full-time staff of 27 employees and over 80 affiliated
researchers in fields ranging from biology to geology, from toxicology
to engineering. Current and upcoming funding for the CBR comes from the
Department of Energy, Office of Naval Research, U.S. Geological Survey,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental
Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Department of Health
and Human Services, and private foundations.
In 1999, the CBR teamed with the Naval Oceanographic Office,
National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, and a number of
academic, state, and private organizations to form the Long-Term
Estuary Assessment Group (LEAG). LEAG (described as the Lower Estuary
Assessment Group in H.R. 3480) seeks a scientific understanding of the
complex Mississippi River / Gulf of Mexico estuary system, how it
functions, its resources and threats to its health, and how it can help
develop technologies and systems for the benefit of the nation. LEAG
views the Mississippi River / Gulf of Mexico estuary as one of
America's greatest natural laboratories, offering nationally important
resources and reflecting the activities of millions of Americans in a
vast drainage basin.
As researchers of the lower Mississippi River, the CBR and LEAG
offer unique perspectives on the Upper Mississippi River Basin
Protection Act of 2001 (H.R. 3480).
Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act of 2001: Our Perspective
from Downriver
We support H.R. 3480. H.R. 3480 promotes scientific efforts to
manage sediment and nutrient loss in the upper Mississippi River and
Illinois River basins'that is, those parts of Minnesota, Wisconsin,
Illinois, Iowa, and Missouri draining into these rivers between Cairo,
Illinois and the headwaters of the Mississippi.
Specifically, H.R. 3480 establishes an integrated program to
monitor and model the nutrient and sediment load of the upper
Mississippi River, with the ultimate goals of reducing (1) the erosion
of these resources from the upper basin and (2) the releases of these
constituents to the lower Mississippi and the extended estuary of the
Gulf of Mexico.
We offer here our perspectives--as scientists and residents of the
lowest part of the Mississippi River--on the benefits of this bill, as
well as our suggestions and recommendations for improving it. But more
importantly, we wish to communicate to the Subcommittee the importance
of keeping those Americans living along the lower Mississippi River
involved and participating in upper-Mississippi legislation and
management, for, as we all know, downriver communities feel each and
every impact upon the river, for better or worse.
While the focus of this bill is the upper Mississippi River basin,
its impact will be felt equally, if not more so, by those Americans who
live along the lower Mississippi River, and whose quality of life
depends in no small part on the environmental health of the Mississippi
River / Gulf of Mexico estuary.
We offer these observations of this bill--the pros and cons--from
our ``downriver'' perspective, as scientists researching the Delta
region, and as residents of the New Orleans area, a city whose land
base was created by the Mississippi, whose economy is dependent on the
Mississippi, and whose unique culture is largely a product of the
Mississippi.
The Pros
From a lower-river perspective, we see the following ``pros'' of
H.R. 3480:
1. Dead Zone
Under natural circumstances, the Mississippi River delivers
nutrients to the Gulf of Mexico, which stimulate the biological
production upon which gulf fisheries depend. Too much of a good thing,
however, is harmful: excess nitrogen fertilizers running off upper
Mississippi Basin farms enable algae in the Gulf of Mexico to grow to
dangerous levels. As the algae die and decompose, they lower oxygen
levels in the Gulf (hypoxia), which kills or drives away animal life,
including commercially important seafood and sport fish. This hypoxic
``Dead Zone'' forms annually and attracts the attention of the media
and public. It effects the lower Mississippi / Gulf of Mexico estuary
region in the following ways:
Ldecreases health and extent of commercial fisheries, an
industry estimated to be worth $2.8 billion annually in coastal
Louisiana;
Lincreases growth of certain algae blooms which are
harmful to marine organisms and humans;
Ldisrupts gulf ecology by eliminating longer-lived species
and bottom-dwellers, and shifting productivity to non-hypoxic periods
and places;
Ldecreases recreational fishing opportunities, worth $1.6
billion annually in coastal Louisiana..
We do not yet know the optimal quantity of river nutrients needed
for the ecological health of the Gulf of Mexico, but the efforts of
H.R. 3480 to address this research need, and its ultimate goal of
reducing excessive nutrients in the river, are positive benefits from
the downriver perspective.
2. Dredging
Under natural conditions, sediments carried by the Mississippi
River are deposited upon the deltaic landscape during periodic floods
(thus creating southern Louisiana) or deposited at the mouth of the
Mississippi River. With the construction of levees for flood control
starting in the early 1700s, these sediments no longer replenished the
lands of southern Louisiana, instead accumulating in and along the
river and eventually at its mouth. As a major commercial waterway
hosting 400,000,000 tons of traffic annually, sections of the lower
Mississippi (particularly the passes at the river's mouth) must now be
dredged repeatedly by the Federal Government for the maintenance of
shipping lanes. The Army Corps of Engineers districts responsible for
the river from St. Louis to the mouth have spent an average of
$84,000,000 annually since 1995 on dredging. In some cases, dredging
may stir up pollutants bound to sediment particles at the bottom of the
river. Sediment build-up is also burdensome to flood-control
infrastructure in Louisiana, particularly the Old River Control
Structure and spillways, as well as riverside wharves, docks, and
industries. The monitoring of sediment flux in the upper river, and
ultimately the reduction of sediment load in the river, are both
encouraged by H.R. 3480. We perceive these as benefits to the lower
Mississippi River region.
3. Nonpoint-Source Pollution
A reduction of sediments and nutrients in the upper Mississippi has
the parallel benefit of reducing the quantity of pesticides,
herbicides, agricultural feed stock, household pollutants, chemicals on
urban surfaces, and bacteria originating from municipal, agricultural,
and industrial sources. Less sediment means fewer particles to which
these contaminants can bind. These are all benefits to the lower
Mississippi River region.
The Cons
From a lower-river perspective, we view the impact of H.R. 3480 as
primarily beneficial. We offer these ``cons'' not as problems with the
bill or concerns about its impact on the lower river, but as
suggestions which recognize the connectivity of the entire river
system.
1. Optimal Level of Nutrients Reaching the Gulf
Further research toward understanding the optimal level of
nutrients reaching the Gulf of Mexico--so as not to create a ``Dead
Zone''--can help scientists and managers set realistic targets in
reducing nutrients in the upper Mississippi. More research is needed in
this area.
2. Sediment Flux
That the Mississippi is a vast transporter of eroded sediments to
the Gulf of Mexico is complicated by its high level of human control,
especially in its lower half and particularly in its last 200 miles.
Our work in understanding sediment flux in the lower river will be
affected by changes in sediment runoff in the upper river. This too
needs to be further researched. Correlating the lower river's fluxes in
sediment and depth with changes in the upper river's sediment load can
aid in our understanding of how this critically important natural
feature functions.
3. Invasive Species
Over a decade ago, zebra mussels from the Caspian and Black Seas
arrived to North America via ballast water dumped by ships in the Great
Lakes region. Since then, this introduced species has invaded the
Mississippi River down to New Orleans and beyond, causing significant
damage to utilities, shipping, and industrial facilities along the
banks of the Mississippi. Scraping mussels from pipes in the Great
Lakes region alone costs between $50 to $100 million a year. Here we
see the Mississippi as a pathway for a biological pollutant, one that
can be as costly as excess nutrients and sediment. We suggest that H.R.
3480, with its monitoring and modeling directives, also seize the
opportunity to study invasive species in the Mississippi River system,
so that costly invasions may be prevented in the future.
4. Impact on Louisiana's Fresh-Water Diversion Projects
To reverse the intrusion of salt water upon Louisiana wetlands and
to combat the state's severe coastal-erosion problem (caused in large
part by the manmade levees' constriction of the river from depositing
sediments beyond its banks), Federal and state agencies have
constructed two major fresh-water diversion projects along the lower
river in Louisiana, with more planned. Total costs are well in the
hundreds of millions of dollars. The aim of these immense engineering
projects is to emulate, as best as modern-day conditions permit, the
historic tendency of the river to overflow its banks, deposit its
sediments in the backswamp, enrich the wetlands with its nutrients, and
push back intruding salt water from the gulf with a plume of fresh
river water. We suggest that H.R. 3480 provide for scientific
assessments of the impact of reduced sediment and nutrient loads on
these fresh-water diversions.
5. A Mississippi River Summit in New Orleans
Our position on the Mississippi in New Orleans offers us a unique
perspective of the connectivity of the upper and lower river, not to
mention its tributaries and sub-basins. We literally live on land
eroded from the upper basin and drink the water drained from it. In
this regard, we note to the Subcommittee that the CBR is currently
creating a National Center for the Mississippi River in New Orleans,
and is actively partnering (through Memoranda of Understanding) with
upper-river organizations such the Science Museum of Minnesota, St.
Louis Science Center, Illinois State Museum, Mississippi River Museum
of Dubuque, Iowa, the Upper Mississippi River Citizen's Commission of
Winona, MN, and Mississippi River Basin Alliance. In this spirit, we
suggest including in H.R. 3480 a ``Mississippi River Summit'' to be
held at the nascent National Center for the Mississippi River, to
coordinate research and activities on both the upper and lower river.
Conclusions
The CBR and LEAG support H.R. 3480. We see in this bill the
benefits of monitoring and modeling toward the reduction of sediment
and nutrients in the Mississippi'thus reducing the size, intensity, and
frequency of the ``Dead Zone'' in the Gulf of Mexico, the need to
dredge the river, and the quantity of pollution in our water supply.
But we also stress that upper-river legislation impacts the lower
river, and that H.R. 3480 can be more effective by addressing the
connectivity of the entire river. LEAG, as a partnership of government,
academia, and private groups involved in monitoring and modeling the
Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico estuary, is an ideal entity for
conducting such activity.
I thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the CBR
and LEAG.
______
Mr. Walden. Thank you, Doctor.
We appreciate the testimony of all of our panelists today.
I am going to start with some questions of Mr. McMillen
regarding House Resolution 3606.
Mr. McMillen, I wonder, just looking through the
information that was provided to me about a project that has
been going on out there for some time, and the participating
agencies are numerous on this sheet. Can you tell me about the
role of the local Bureau of Reclamation has played in your
discussions and perhaps other Federal agencies too?
Mr. McMillen. Certainly. That list of participating
agencies, the local stakeholders organized stakeholder meetings
and invited all of those agencies, of which the Bureau was part
of that.
The Bureau has been involved in conservation fish passage
projects in the valley since as early as 1984. There was a
study done in the upper valley looking at consolidation and
turning ditches into pipelines, those type of things. It was
about a $20-million project that reached very final stages
before it was basically put on the shelf because of lack of
public support.
We have worked with the Bureau. The Bureau has been in the
lower valley, the Lostine part of the project, over the last 10
years, doing the same type of work, conservation of fish
passage.
The infrastructure, which is Phase III of this project,
what it is designed to do is to provide water in the irrigation
system, leave the Lostine River water in the Lostine for
Endangered Species. The Bureau has done all of that preliminary
engineering work. We have not been involved.
However, that part of the project is not feasible unless
the dam is rehabbed to provide about 3,500 to 4,000 acre-feet
of storage for that water exchange. That is what the Associated
Ditch Companies has already got agreement from their
participating farmers to permanently allocate that to the
Federal Government for that water exchange. So there is a
Federal participation and Federal ownership issue with this,
and that is in the storage itself.
So it has been ongoing at the Bureau. The Corps of
Engineers have been involved, the National Marine Fisheries
Service. Every Federal agency that has any interest in this
project was invited and has been in attendance to three
stakeholder meetings. That started about 2 years ago.
Mr. Walden. And they are supportive of the concept that you
have laid out?
Mr. McMillen. Yes. This project actually falls right in
line with the biological opinion of the National Marine
Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, looking
for basically off-river mitigation, both for the Bureau and the
Corps projects. This is a total watershed approach for
basically protecting and enhancing endangered species.
Mr. Walden. Have any of these Federal agencies that
embraced and helped create this plan stepped forward to say we
will help fund it, in terms of the major element, which is the
dam restoration?
Mr. McMillen. No, they have not. The Corps of Engineers was
approached. They also have funding limitations in their current
programs. They do have some money available for fish passage.
We have approached Bonneville Power Administration, and they
are interested, through their normal funding process of
providing funding, matching funds, to help with the fish
restoration aspects, fish passage at the dams.
Mr. Walden. What about the State of Oregon--since, you
know, the commissioner referenced that in his testimony, the
Dam Safety Study that was done there--is the State of Oregon
stepping forward to help finance this?
Mr. McMillen. The State of Oregon, back in 1995, when they
issued, in 1996, they issued a letter basically listing this as
a high-hazard structure. We brought them in. We actually put
together a complete funding evaluation, looking at State grant,
Federal money, everything we could find, and the State has no
money available for this scale of a project. That was
evaluated.
Mr. Walden. So, if you have no State funding and you have
no Federal funding, what are your prospects?
Mr. McMillen. We have none.
Mr. Walden. In terms of even keeping the dam safe?
Mr. McMillen. No. Because if you look at the cost of being
able to replace the structure and the payback, it is beyond the
ability of the agricultural community that is currently there.
Mr. Walden. Do you know the population of the ag community,
the patrons in this district?
Mr. McMillen. The total population in the valley, there are
400 shareholders that directly pull water out of irrigation,
there is about another 200 shareholder farmers that get it
through secondary use.
Mr. Walden. So maximum is 600 people you estimate--
Mr. McMillen. Six hundred farmers, yes.
Mr. Walden. --farmers, $32 million?
Mr. McMillen. That is correct. Let me clarify a little bit
on that. The dam rehabilitation, which is Phase I, is about $7
million, and the rest of it is related to fishery restoration
and hydropower.
We did look into trying to do a private financing, look at
a rate gain, and it is just very difficult, in the current
agriculture economies, to be able to pay that back.
Mr. Walden. Thank you. My time has expired.
Mr. Kind?
Mr. Kind. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to thank, again, the witnesses for your
testimony today and for the help that you provided with the
drafting of the legislation. We worked closely with many of
you, and we look forward to working closely as this moves
forward and as we better integrate the planning at all levels
on what we can do to sustain the river basin.
Dr. Schnoor, I appreciated the opportunity of co-chairing
that working group that we had last year in regards to the
Mississippi through the National Research Council. As you are
aware, in this legislation it would call for funding of the
National Research Council, the National Academy of Sciences, an
assessment of the river basin.
Could you explain to us the importance of that and whether
you have had some expertise in this area and other watershed
areas in providing such an assessment.
Mr. Schnoor. Yes, we think the assessment is important, and
the National Research Council is prepared to go ahead with
that, should H.R. 3480 become law. The National Research
Council, as you know, is the operating arm of the National
Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering and
the Institutes of Medicine. It was chartered by Congress in
1863 to advise the Government on matters of science and
technology.
We are prepared to go ahead with an assessment of the Upper
Mississippi River Valley Protection Act, if this passes,
through the Water, Science and Technology Board, of which I am
a member.
Unfortunately, he had another meeting and had to leave, but
Steven Parker, who is the staff director of that group, was
here earlier and is very much interested and feels this is a
strong need of the NRC to do an assessment like this, and the
chairman of our committee is Richard Luthy from Stanford
University, and he agrees as well.
Mr. Kind. What would be the goal of the assessment? What
would you be trying to produce?
Mr. Schnoor. We would produce basically a book in about a
2-year period, six to eight meetings, in which some of the
Nation's experts in the area of water quality would behold the
literature and would be brought together as sort of initiation,
I would say, to all of the research in monitoring and modeling
required under 3480. So it is kind of a kick-off assessment and
book of where we stand right now.
Mr. Kind. Thank you.
Mr. Daigle, I understand that you recently participated in
a conference in St. Louis involving many of the shareholders
that are going to be working to be implement the interagency
action plan. Was there any discussion or talk about the
importance of monitoring and getting good models in place in
regards to the action plan at that conference?
Mr. Daigle. Yes, that was the meeting of the Gulf Hypoxia
Task Force, the first time it has been convened under the Bush
administration, and that was a real key theme that came out
from people all along the river.
The representatives of the task force are from Federal
agencies and the States, and the secretary of the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency made a very strong point that she
supports doing this, but she has got to have the monitoring
funding. It is just critical for all of the water quality
groups.
Mr. Kind. Thank you.
Ms. Stoerker, you had a chance to listen to Director
Hirsch's testimony, and he raised a concern in regards to the
cost sharing that is contained in the legislation. I know you
had some input in regards to the States' perspective, at least
given your position there in regards to the cost sharing. Could
you quickly explain why you think the cost sharing contained in
this legislation is workable and important.
Ms. Stoerker. Sure. Two points I think worth making in that
regard. One is that the States, as many of you are aware, are
in dire financial straits. Mr. Daigle just mentioned the fact
that the commissioner of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
made a passionate plea for this program earlier in February.
She was hoping to be at this hearing, but could not leave the
State because she has to lay off 150 employees this week.
The second point I think worth making about cost sharing,
from the States' point of view, is that the Mississippi River
is very much a national river, and we have a tremendous Federal
influence on that river. The Corps of Engineers, a Federal
agency, needs to dredge, and so forth. So I think there is a
very unique kind of Federal interest in that system, which does
not suggest that the States should not come up to the plate and
participate as cost-share partners. I think they are eager to
do that. I think that there are going to be some practical, as
well as kind of public policy, concerns about that.
Mr. Kind. Thank you.
And, finally, Dr. McLachlan, I was particularly interested
in hearing your feedback on this and the support for the
legislation, given your perspective from the Lower Mississippi
region. And I believed from the very beginning that we need to
start dealing with the Mississippi River Basin as one
continuous ecosystem and start coordinating and managing the
plans is that we view it as one, continuous, flowing ecosystem.
And that is probably the best hope we have of seeing
significant change and improvement in the area, and I
appreciate your interest in this legislation.
Could you speak briefly on the importance, in your view, of
better cooperation and collaboration between the Upper Miss
region and the Southern Miss region.
Mr. McLachlan. The Upper and Lower Mississippi is more of a
political distinction than a real distinction, and everything
that happens in one part of the river system is expressed in
the other.
When I started working in New Orleans 7 years ago, when I
moved to Tulane--I was in the Federal Government before then--I
told my mother once, who still lives in Pittsburgh, that
everything she does I will find out about 2 weeks later, so she
should be careful.
[Laughter.]
Mr. McLachlan. And I think that that is more or less the
sense of connectedness not only in the ecosystem, but just as
we have expressed here. Every time people who are working on
the river get together, we establish other connections, either
through websites or interactive science museums. So I think
there is almost a kind of a groundswell of interest in river
research, river education that was not there really 5 or 6
years ago.
I should also say that in terms of our national commitment
to homeland defense and concern, that most of the academic
centers studying water have been focused outwardly on
oceanography, and that in some ways one should start to look
for strips or a ``Woods Hole'' of the river in the riverine
systems, which now are so important not only to our defense,
but really to our livelihood, and I think that one way to do
that also would be to assure that the USGS budget and the other
agencies that are so critically involved in river strength and
maintenance would certainly be kept at a high level.
Thank you.
Mr. Kind. Thank you again. I thank all of the witnesses for
your interest in this and your testimony today. As I said, as
we move forward with the legislation, I look forward to working
with you in the future.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That is all I have.
Mr. Walden. Thank you.
I also want to thank the witnesses for your valuable
testimony and Mr. Kind for joining us today.
The members of the Subcommittee, some of whom obviously
aren't here today, may have some additional questions they want
to submit to the witnesses, and we would ask that you respond
to those in writing. The hearing record will be held open for
these responses until March 21st of 2002.
If there is no further business before the Subcommittee,
the Chairman again thanks the members of the Committee and our
witnesses, and without objection the Subcommittee now stands
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:20 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
-