Editorial: Pro-River Folks Shouldn’t Let Up On WRDA 2005

The U.S. House of Representatives voted recently to recognize the value of water resource development by passing the Water Resources Development Act of 2005 (WRDA) with an overwhelming tally of 406–14. Now, as the time approaches for final consideration of a similar bill by the Senate and hopefully a conference to work out differences, we call upon river supporters to continue the good fight.

Opposition to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the towing industry never eases. Time and again, old myths are repeated in an effort to get congressional delegates to believe river transportation is no longer in demand and that the Corps’ methods are questionable.

Inaccuracies and myths that have been explained numerous times, unfortunately, have not gone away. Critics repeat them, knowing that someone will take heed.

Earlier this month inaccurate contents of a report produced by avowed critics of the Corps were repeated in a Lakeland, Fla., Ledger editorial bashing the Corps—Florida, of all places, where the Corps has scheduled more than $8 billion in work to restore the Everglades. Other Corps money has been spent over the years to restore Florida beaches, denuded by hurricanes and tropical storms. The Ledger writer apparently believes in "biting the hand." How many millions of tourist dollars have been spent in the Lakeland area because of restoration work done by the Corps? How many federal dollars did it take to make it possible?

The Ledger editorial repeats the frequently debunked myth that puts Donald Sweeney, a Corps economist now teaching at a St. Louis institution of higher learning, on a pedestal for revealing that Corps hierarchy was "cooking the books" to make the Upper Mississippi/Illinois River project seem more palatable. The editorial never states that when the facts finally came out, the National Academy of Science exonerated the Corps, that the Corps-critical Army Inspector General’s report was actually based on testimony by Sweeney, who finally admitted before a congressional subcommittee that his "Essence" model was faulty. He had, according to other congressional subcommittee testimony, caused the wasteful expenditure of millions of taxpayer dollars. Sweeney was taken off the project.

It is necessary to continue debunking the myths, because critics keep repeating them, knowing that some readers will not know the truth. A lie repeated often enough becomes the truth, they believe.

The Ledger material originated in a report titled "Crossroads: Congress, the Corps of Engineers and the Future of America’s Water Resources," which noted that barge traffic has remained stagnant for 15 years. The authors, avowed opponents of the Corps, are the National Wildlife Federation and the Washington-based Taxpayers for Common Sense.

In general, barge traffic on the Missouri and on the Upper Mississippi has been a focus of attention for some time. Barge operators are waiting in the wings to get back on the Missouri, where traffic has all but disappeared. After years of challenges to the Corps to produce unnatural spring floods with reservoir releases and other challenges related to endangered species, it is not surprising that traffic is down. Exacerbated by a drought stretching out more than five years, Missouri main stem reservoirs are low, making water for a variety of uses scarce. A new Corps report on August 8, however, indicates July runoff has enabled the Corps to increase storage at three of the six reservoirs. No one claims the drought is over, but it seems to be receding.

One of the oft-repeated myths is that "Between 1990 and 2004, traffic through the five major locks [on the Upper Mississippi] dropped 40 to 50 percent." That is misleading, because it suggests a dramatic decline in traffic over a 14-year period. In reality, the 40-to-50-percent figure was produced by taking the best traffic figure in the 14-year period and comparing it to 2004, which was the second-worst traffic year for Locks 20–25. We reported at the time that the 2004 traffic decline was primarily due to record high ocean freight rates, which made it more attractive to ship some mid-western grain by rail to the Pacific Northwest for Far East markets. (The decline, by the way, was not reflected in Illinois River traffic figures.) Those high ocean rates are by no means a permanent condition, and traffic through Locks 20–25 to date in 2005 is up from the 2004 levels.

Industry leaders tell us that Upper Miss traffic forecasts often consider only agricultural products and not the 50 percent of other cargo that moves on the Upper Miss system.

It has been suggested that the Corps "…pushed for the [Upper Miss] project, suggesting that under the most likely scenario, river traffic between 2000 and 2025 would increase 30 percent." Actually, five scenario-based analyses were used. The estimates ranged from no traffic increase to as high as 45 percent. The central ground of these scenarios suggested traffic growth of 30 percent. The Corps says it did not label any of the scenarios as "most likely."

Another myth says that the Corps traffic projections have materialized only two of 14 times on waterway projects. But when the Corps’ Institute for Water Resources examined 15 projects that were prepared for 10 waterways between 1943 and 1989, it found that about three-fourths of the Corps projects were either closely estimated or underestimated.

In a matter of weeks, the Senate will likely take up WRDA 2005 and, hopefully, will pass it. The usual procedure, then, is for Senate and House to confer over their differences and finalize the bill.

We are never uncomfortable when Congress deals with the truth. We are counting on river supporters everywhere to make sure that congressional delegates do not go into that conference armed only with myths.

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.)