Editorial: There’s Hope For Missouri River Navigation Yet

No matter what flows out of H.R. 1 (the stimulus bill) to benefit U.S. waterways in general, there is, as the WJ announced last week, positive action ahead for lower Missouri River navigation. That is because the state of Missouri plans to increase port funding from less than $1 million to $6.65 million. It will take time. Navigation didn’t die out rapidly, and it won’t come back rapidly. But the effort will create jobs.

The key to spending stimulus money is that it must be released by the Office of Management and Budget, and surely no problems are anticipated there. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has a river-project backlog of $60 billion plus, made up of projects that were authorized but not funded. The stimulus package provides somewhat over $4 billion for waterway projects above the Corps’ normal budget, and, importantly, that sum is not subject to the 50-50 cost-share with the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.

As our February 16 story reported, Missouri state officials and Corps personnel met and discussed the ups and downs of river navigation. Important is their list of three major obstacles to increased navigation—unpredictable flows; management for species rather than navigation; and channel markers not being maintained.

There is an all-important fourth obstacle that directly influences the other three. Congress passed environmental bills in the 1970s and sowed the seeds of ongoing confrontation by creating unlimited obstacles to progress in general—not just with water projects. Any project deemed to interfere with the environment violates the law. Anyone can challenge in court any undertaking in the U.S., thus put into motion events that can prevent projects from moving ahead for years. We have no idea how many lawsuits have been filed in recent decades to hobble Missouri River undertakings. These lawsuits deplete Corps and industry coffers as they respond to court challenges. For a different example, note that the amount of money spent during the snail darter issue on the Little Tennessee River in Eastern Tennessee was multimillions.

The number of stakeholders having Missouri River water rights is high. Issues vary, but water is still a key ingredient to success for many operations there. After a major drought such as the one we have had for the better part of a decade, water is at a premium—thus the necessity to reduce the lower river navigation season.

In reality, if Congress doesn’t amend environmental law to give navigation projects a fair chance, we could be facing a lost cause. Obama must be made to understand this. How many in Congress are willing to fix those laws, which should have been amended years ago?

Billions of dollars worth of industrial development has been prevented by laws to protect species that haven’t been seen in decades, to protect species that are not in the least endangered, and to protect the unnatural implanting of species in areas where they were never intended to be. As this relates to the Missouri River, the battles over least terns, plovers and pallid sturgeon focus on a reach of river measuring about 40 miles in length, while these species seem plentiful elsewhere. This has impacted the entire river from Sioux City, Iowa, to the Mississippi River. Other examples include timbering operations that were shut down in western states to protect spotted owls, which were found to be as numerous as grass blades on the prairie; and the finding of 77 varieties of snail darters in streams in Tennessee.

We may have difficulty meeting demands for Missouri River water, and without an end to drought, navigation flows probably will remain unpredictable. One can understand less maintenance on channel markers when there is no traffic, although we would hope for more. But unreasonable management of the river for species rather than navigation is something Congress can correct. It should!

The Waterways Journal encourages letters to the editor.
Have something on your mind?
Send letters to: jshoulberg@waterwaysjournal.net.
(Please indicate whether or not your letter is intended for publication.)