Editorial: Crucial Data Sometimes Unknown Or Ignored

In the overall scheme of things, we sometimes find out years too late that crucial data that was unknown to (or ignored by) planners frequently produced undesirable effects.

A simple example of this conclusion can be seen in the instance of America’s new “favorite,” ethanol. We learned last week—for the first time, to our knowledge—that ethanol fires are far more difficult to extinguish than regular gasoline fires, that they require special, costly foam to put them out, and that this situation finds many, if not most, fire departments ill-equipped. One can only ask if this attribute of ethanol was only discovered recently, or was it conveniently kept a secret? Examples of the didn’t-know/just-ignored phenomenon are everywhere. Some are serious. Some not.

The intentional increase in otters on Missouri streams produced results that should have been obvious beforehand but apparently were not. When fishermen began to complain about the disappearance of catchable game fish in the streams, it suddenly occurred to everyone that fish are a natural food of otters. Would one think that someone would have thought of that in the planning phase?

The intentional increase in the number of grizzly bears and wolves in the wilds adjacent to “civilization” has produced a flurry of complaints about livestock being killed. How difficult was that to forecast?

A very costly, though not recent, example involved the lawsuit-delayed replacement of old Locks and Dam 26 near Alton, Ill., on the Upper Mississippi River. We don’t think there was much unknown about the project, originally estimated to cost $330 million. The delay could not be prevented by the St. Louis Engineer District, which was chomping at the bits to open bids one September day, when a sign was posted at the entrance to the Corps office announcing cancellation of the bid opening due to lawsuits. The Corps’ plans took inflation into account, but when the project was delayed virtually 10 years, the price ballooned to about $1.2 billion. Because the locks and dam replacement was so critical to keep navigation flowing more efficiently, it was mandatory to ignore railroad claims that they would be able to charge an additional $750 million more for every year of the delay. We think they did. That delay forced the river industry to acquiesce and accept federally imposed user fees on fuel.

Whenever proposals are delayed for any length of time, by opposition or not, project costs can be expected to rise dramatically, and they usually do.

Another factor we must keep in mind is the length of time it takes to complete projects—often many years. If a dam project that will take five years to build is delayed 10 years by opposition, then we are looking at a completion date roughly 15 years away.

Crucial at any time is determination of how critical the need is for a given project. After squabbling for years over how to pay for a new bridge over the Mississippi at St. Louis, Illinois and Missouri finally reached agreement last week. The bridge is estimated to cost some $600 million. Well, better late than never. But that is not always true.

Ideas have a strange way of going out of vogue. Occasionally, a person upbraided for having done something that turned out not as expected responds, “It seemed a good idea at the time.”

The Pony Express, which originated in St. Joseph, Mo., and delivered mail to California, was an idea that worked well temporarily before telegraph lines were erected. Had the planners waited too long, the need would have evaporated.

But look at it this way. When government figures indicate that transportation needs in the nation are going to rise dramatically over the next 20 years, we should not doubt it. Look at air service. Look at the increase in vehicular traffic. A glance at population figures tells us that goods and services for the burgeoning population require improved and expanded transportation services. To sit on one’s hands or bury one’s head in the sand hoping the need will go away is folly.

Such probably is the case with the long-ignored maintenance and modernization of our transportation infrastructure. To delay is truly folly. Unless our population and populations around the world are devastated by war or natural disaster, this work, and work akin to it, simply must take place. The longer we wait, the higher the cost—not only dollarwise! Money seems to be getting scarcer all the time, but setting priorities can direct spending to the most important projects.

We think water resource development fits into this category. The longer we wait, the less efficient our river system becomes. The longer we delay, the more apt we are to experience a major collapse of a navigation facility. Facilities on rivers are akin to power company facilities in that the collapse or failure of one can trigger a chain reaction. The power failures last week in Florida make that clear.

No matter who ends up in the White House after the general election, it is crucial that those who govern understand the importance of priorities and that they do not let meaningless politics stand in the way of what is necessary for our country to remain economically viable.

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.)