Welcome Audio

Authors
- Meet Amy our Northwest river expert
- Meet Betsy our national water policy extraordinaire
- Meet Chas our social media and technology evangelist
- Meet Darcy our Washington state water policy expert
- Meet David our wild & scenic river guru
- Meet Gary our video and stormwater guru
- Meet Jamie our blue trails expert
- Meet Jenny our Southeast water efficiency expert
- Meet John our Hydropower Reform Coalition director
- Meet Katie our Great Lakes stormwater management expert
- Meet Katherine our river advocacy director
- Meet Lindsay our daily river quotes and web editor
- Meet Matt our our Southeast blue trail & hydro guy
- Meet Rebecca president of American Rivers
- Meet Serena our dam removal expert
Categories
Stay Informed via RSS
Archives
River Photos
Blogroll

Small Streams Matter - Clean Water Restoration Act Needed Now

Posted on April 11, 2008 | Filed Under Clean Water, Government Affairs, Healthy Waters

Katherine Baer, Director
Healthy Waters Campaign

I was listening to the hearing on the Clean Water Restoration Act in the Senate Enviro nment and Public Works Committee the other day - and what struck me was how little streams have so many powerful groups (and politicians) running scared! The legislation would reaffirm the traditional scope of the Clean Wa ter Act, which has been chipped away by confusing Court decisions and poor agency guidance, to ensure clean drinking water for millions. Some opposition groups are using tactics to scare their members - like claiming that puddles will be regulated - and these wild claims have made their way into the political debate.

But maybe these folks are right to be scared of small streams, because they are powerful after all…. powerful that is at cleaning the water and preventing flooding. A recent scientific article in the journal Nature added to the well established heap of science showing that small streams play a powerful role in removing pollution. One coauthor, Stephen Hamilton, said: “the trick is to allowing lazy, meandering rivers to do their job instead of diverting them into straight drainage ditches that act more like water pipes and less like filters.” Small streams are also powerful in keeping us safe from floods, no small feat in the face of global warming.

A majority of states strongly support protecting these small streams that flow together to become our big rivers. As part of her written testimony, Arizona’s Director for Water Quality, Joan Card, stated that over 200 million gallons a day of municipal and industrial sewage could be dumped by polluters into small streams flowing into populated areas if these streams are no longer covered by the Clean Water Act, which is likely given that 96% of the states streams are now at risk after 30 plus years of protection.

Federal safeguards are also needed for people in other states where clean water is already being challenged. In Tennessee, a proposed state law would severely restrict clean water protection and is being opposed by many including our colleague Rene Hoyos of the Tennessee Clean Water Network.

Small streams matter - to people upstream and downstream who rely on clean water. The Clean Water Restoration Act is needed now to reaffirm their protection and restore certainty to an increasingly ineffective regulatory system.

Politics makes strange bedfellows

Posted on March 11, 2008 | Filed Under Dam Removal, Government Affairs, Northeast, Quotes, River Renewal

Serena McClain, Associate Director of River Renewal
River Renewal, Restoring Rivers

But, you know, it doesn’t make sense to guard a dam against a terrorist attack if it crumbles because no one has repaired it for the last 50 years. And this is my big lesson from Katrina, which is not a FEMA issue, but it is: If you let infrastructure go for 30, 40 or 50 years because you’re spending money on earmarks or other things, then in the end you’re going to have something that is going to cost you a hell of a lot more money, and worse, probably cost you some human lives.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff

Last week Laura Wildman, our resident engineer and Director of River Science, left her post restoring rivers of the Northeast to fly down to D.C. and participate in the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) lobby day.

American Rivers hasn’t always been known to jump into bed with ASCE. However, for the past two years, we have been working toward seeing the Dam Rehabilitation and Repair Act (S. 2238) become law. The bill, if passed, will provide states with funding to remove or repair high hazard dams.

With extreme weather events only expected to become more common and our nation’s dam infrastructure continuing to age, now is the time to heed the advice of our Secretary for Homeland Security. Let’s arm people not with weapons but with funding that could mean the difference between another Kaloko or a community who is able to restore their river and remove the threat of a deficient dam.

Yazoo Pumps Comments Due Today!!!

Posted on January 22, 2008 | Filed Under Alerts, Deep South, Flood Protection, Government Affairs, River Renewal

Joyce Wu, Program Associate
Natural Flood Protection

Comments to the Corps on the Yazoo Pumps, a 67 year-old project that will destroy 200,000 acres of wetlands, are due today, Jan. 22nd, 2008. Please take a few moments to send a letter to the Corps to show your opposition to this boondoggle project, which over 500 scientists say is a bad idea. https://secure2.convio.net/amr/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=961

You can find more information on the Yazoo Pumps at http://www.americanrivers.org/site/PageServer?pagename=AR7_YazooPumpsLetter.

Good enough for government work?

Posted on December 21, 2007 | Filed Under Government Affairs, Green Infrastructure, Healthy Waters, Policy Review

Gary Belan, Director of Healthy Waters Campaign
Healthy Waters, Catching the Rain

Actually, I’d say pretty good for government work. My colleague Katherine Baer and I got a message yesterday from Nancy Stoner over at NRDC that this language made it into the new Energy Bill (on its way to the President for signing as I type).

We had a talk with Nancy about this when it was in the early stages and we actually contributed some language. The part I’m most excited about is the inclusion of temperature. Most stormwater requirements only refer to rate or volume and rarely to temperature, because temperature is a harder requirement to meet particularly if you’re using detention ponds. With temperature included, I hope that this will lead to more infiltration based practices, which cools the water naturally and filters it too.

Thanks a bunch to Senator Cardin and the Clean Water Network for all the work they put into getting this passed. I’m pretty excited about this making it through.

SEC. 438. STORM WATER RUNOFF REQUIREMENTS FOR FEDERAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.

The sponsor of any development or redevelopment project involving a Federal facility with a footprint that exceeds 5,000 square feet shall use site planning, design, construction, and maintenance strategies for the property to maintain or restore, to the maximum extent technically feasible, the predevelopment hydrology of the property with regard to the temperature, rate, volume, and duration of flow.

Fun Facts on Yazoo, con’t.

Posted on November 13, 2007 | Filed Under Deep South, Flood Protection, Government Affairs, River Renewal, Southeast

Joyce Wu, Program Associate
Natural Flood Protection

In a previous blog entry, I posted some information on the environmental damage that the Yazoo Pumps would cause, drawing this response from Mr. Frank Worley, a Corps public affairs official:

“The Yazoo Backwater project is not designed, nor intended to ‘drain’ anything, but to lower flood levels in the Delta.

The project includes a pump station and also includes a huge non-structural component which is the purchase of conservation easements to reforest 55,600 acres of land that will never again be used for agriculture.

The pump station would only be operated during specific backwater flood conditions. We invite you to review the final report when it is released for more specific details on the project as proposed.”

First of all, I want to thank Mr. Worley for taking an interest in and commenting on the AR blog site. American Rivers appreciates any opportunity to engage in a dialogue about our work, and the part of the purpose of blogging was exactly to spark this kind of discussion.

In response to Mr. Worley’s comment, I would like to quote from two documents on which the information in the post is based. These documents are from the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, two federal agencies that have formally protested the Yazoo Backwater Pumps project because of the major damage it will cause to wetlands and other natural resources. These documents provide the most recent information available to the public on the Yazoo Pumps; we look forward to reading the Final EIS when it is published.

In a letter to the Corps’ Vicksburg Disctrict on November 3, 2000, EPA:

wrote that the Yazoo Pumps would “result in adverse impacts to over 200,000 acres of wetlands in the Mississippi River floodplain, cause water quality impairment, and further degrade already impaired waters.�?
gave the Yazoo Pumps its lowest rating (Environmentally Unsatisfactory-3), and said that the project was appropraite for a Clean Water Act veto because of its “substantial and unacceptable adverse environmental consequences.” (There have only been 11 Clean Water Act vetoes ever, so it is clear that the Pumps pose a major threat to the environment.)
noted that the damage that would be caused by the Pumps could be largely avoided by the use of a nonstructural alternative proposed by researchers from Virginia Tech University and the US Geological Survey.
expressed concern about its perception that the Corps did not appear at all to seriously consider a nonstructural alternative to building a pumping plant to pump water out of, and thus draining, the Yazoo Backwater area.

In its October 2006 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act report, the US Fish and Wildlife Service:

wrote that the Yazoo Pumps would cut off the hydrological cycle of backwater flooding that “is critically important to maintenance of project-area wetland and aquatic habitat values, including fisheries production.�? This flooding cycle provides the biochemical link to the rest of the lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley ecosystem.
concluded that the Corps’ plan for the Yazoo Pumps is “ecologically unsound.�?
commented that the Corps’ recommended plan is “one of the most environmentally damaging alternatives of 35 proposals that were initially developed during the consensus-building process. Reasonable alternatives involving nonstructural, flood damage reduction features [were] rejected without being thoroughly evaluated.�?

We at American Rivers recognize that structural flood reduction projects may well be necessary when large populations and critical infrastructure are at risk, such as in the New Orleans area. However, the Corps has the legal responsibility not to construct such projects until it has demonstrated that other less costly and less environmentally damaging alternatives could not do the job. According to EPA and FWS, the Corps has not come close to meeting this burden in the case of the Yazoo Pumps project, but instead recommended an incredibly costly wetland drainage project that will cause far-reaching and permanent environmental harm.

Again, we welcome dialogue on our work, and invite continued discussion on this important issue.

The New York Times Weighs In on the Yazoo Pumps

Posted on November 6, 2007 | Filed Under Deep South, Flood Protection, Government Affairs, River Renewal, Southeast

Joyce Wu, Program Associate
Natural Flood Protection

With the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Yazoo Pumps–a destructive and fiscally irresponsible Army Corps of Engineers project in southern Mississippi–due at the end of the week, the New York Times published this spot-on editorial on the project today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/opinion/06tue3.html?th&emc=th

Dam safety gets a boost

Posted on November 1, 2007 | Filed Under Dam Removal, Government Affairs, River Renewal

Serena McClain, Associate Director of River Renewal
River Renewal, Restoring Rivers

Earlier this week the Dam Rehabilitation and Repair Act (H.R. 3224) passed the House of Representatives. This isn’t just another wonky bill out of DC where you find yourself wondering how this benefits you and your life. If passed, the bill would authorize Congress to empower the states with $200 million to put toward the repair or removal of publicly owned, high hazard dams at the greatest risk of failure.

Given the current state of our nation’s dams (by now we all know the American Society of Civil Engineers has given them a D on their most recent report card) this funding is only the beginning of what is needed to address this aging infrastructure. We find ourselves caught between the fact that of the more than 10,000 known high hazard dams some 1,333 have been deemed unsafe (September 6th press release) and the thought that the problem could be far worse than we think given that our nation’s dam safety inspectors are overburdened (the average responsible for around 400 dams).

Almost all of us live near a dam whether we know it or not. While these dams vary widely in size and type and many are considered low hazard, we can’t ignore the fact that there are dams out there that pose a risk to others. The Dam Rehabilitation and Repair Act gives states just one more tool to fix dams badly in need of repair or even remove the dam altogether if it makes sense for that particular structure and community.

So, thank you, Congressman Salazar and all of the others who voted for the bill. Keep checking here as we look to the Senate to follow suit and pass the companion legislation that was introduced by Senators Akaka and Voinovich.

Speaking Up for Sewage Right to Know

Posted on October 24, 2007 | Filed Under Government Affairs, Healthy Waters, Sewage

Katherine Baer, Director
Healthy Waters Campaign

Last week, I had the opportunity to testify on the Sewage Right to Know Bill (H.R. 2452) at a hearing in the House of Representatives. Talk about nervous… I remember my colleague Peter Raabe telling me about his experience testifying and that it wasn’t that bad, but still! As it turned out, the Hearing was chaired by the bill’s champions Representatives Bishop (D-NY) and LoBiondo (R-NJ) and so they were pretty amenable to hearing what I had to say about the great need for a consistent federal law to keep people safe while they enjoy swimming and playing in their favorite streams and rivers.

Overall, the testimony was extremely favorable. Dr. Summers, from the Maryland Department of Environment, explained how Maryland’s strong monitoring and notification requirements had helped quantify sewage pollution problems and were greatly appreciated by many utilities as it allowed them to explain and justify why more investment is required. Stuart Whitford, from the Kitsap County Health Department in Washington explained his support of H.R. 2452 by telling a scary story about a sewage spill that went on for two years before anyone realized what was going on (and after 4.8 million gallons of sewage was spilled!).

Microbiologist Erin Lipp did a great job of explaining how potent just a little bit of raw sewage can be and that the illnesses from sewage are vastly underreported.

Finally, even Kevin Schafer, the representative for the wastewater treatment community supported the monitoring and notification, but just wanted to make sure that details were spelled out.

I think that Representative Bishop summed it up pretty well in his blog about the hearing where he wrote:

[E]ven with significant increases in investment, sewer overflows will likely continue to occur. Therefore, it is equally imperative that we provide our citizens with comprehensive and timely notification of sewer overflows.

All in all a good day for sewage right to know - I guess it was worth all the butterflies in my stomach…

Fun Facts on Yazoo, or, Why the Corps Should Dump the Pumps

Posted on October 19, 2007 | Filed Under Deep South, Flood Protection, Government Affairs, River Renewal, Southeast

Joyce Wu, Program Associate
Natural Flood Protection

In 2000, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concluded that the Yazoo Pumps would drain and damage more than 200,000 acres of ecologically significant wetlands in the heart of the
Mississippi River flyway – a critical migration route for 20 percent of the nation’s duck populations. That is seven times more wetlands than all the nation’s private developers harm in one year nationwide. The Corps recently acknowledged that 26,300 acres would be drained dry. All of this damage will happen in an area that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) describes as having some of the richest natural resources in the nation.

Corps Resurrecting Destructive World War II Era Project

Posted on October 17, 2007 | Filed Under Deep South, Flood Protection, Government Affairs, River Renewal, Southeast

Joyce Wu, Program Associate
Natural Flood Protection

Sixty-six years of opposition have not been enough for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to give up on a flood control project that won’t actually protect homes. Over the objections of the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Corps is continuing to push for the Yazoo Pumps—a proposal to build the world’s largest hydraulic pumping plant that will drain 200,000 acres of what the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service called some of the richest resources in the country. The real purpose of the project is not to protect people from flooding, but to open up thousands of acres of rich (and sparsely populated) floodplain land to more intensive farming.

Local stakeholders and federal agencies have fought against this project because it violates the Clean Water Act, violates federal policy, is not economically justified, and impacts wetlands that have already been set aside for federal protection. Furthermore, the whopping $211 million price-tag is a 100% federal cost; the Corps wants taxpayers to shoulder the entire financial burden.

The Yazoo pumps will squander federal tax dollars.

Some 80% of the project’s alleged benefits are from increased agricultural production, mostly from more federal subsidies. If this project is authorized, the federal government will spend $211 million tax dollars to increase agricultural production in the Mississippi Delta, where farmers received $15.3 billion in subsidies from 1996 to 2001 and where the federal government is already actively setting aside sensitive croplands to decrease production.

Furthermore, the pumps will not appreciably save local homeowners from flood disasters. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, residential flooding is very limited in the project area. From 1979 to 2002, the National Flood Insurance Program paid out just $1.664 million in flood loss claims. At that rate, it would take more than 3,054 years to recoup the construction investment in the Yazoo Pumps.

The project itself is also fundamentally flawed. An independent analysis commissioned by the EPA revealed that the Corps’ calculations inflated the project’s economic benefits by a stunning $144 million.

The Yazoo pumps will destroy the local environment.

The Yazoo Backwater Area is a haven for migratory birds, floodplain fisheries and wildlife. The project area is also nationally renowned for excellent deer, waterfowl, and other game hunting. In fact, the region became famous in 1902 for being the original home of the ‘Teddy Bear.’ While hunting in the Yazoo Backwater Area, President Theodore Roosevelt’s refusal to shoot a bear that had been tied to a tree spawned the iconic children’s toy.

The Yazoo pumps project will damage or harm 200,000 acres of ecologically significant wetlands, much of which are national park land, mitigation for earlier federal projects, or voluntary restoration projects. The Yazoo pumps will also change the hydrology of 925,000 acres of the Mississippi delta—almost the entire historic delta floodplain for the Mississippi River.

The Yazoo pumps do not have local, national, or federal support.

The Yazoo pumps have met with local and national opposition for 65 years. The Clarion Ledger, the largest newspaper in the state of Mississippi, the New York Times, and papers and magazines from Oregon to New England have repeatedly and consistently editorialized against the project.

Moreover, both the EPA and USFWS have stated that the project should not proceed because of its colossal environmental toll, and because the project violates federal law as well as federal wetlands policy. According to the EPA, the pumps’ wetlands impacts will be 25 times greater than the combined impacts of all other projects it had vetoed because of Clean Water Act Section 404 (c) violations. This final EIS does not improve on the Draft EIS, which received the EPA’s lowest rating—EU-3, Environmentally Unsatisfactory – Inadequate.

In its Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act report, published as recently as 2006, the USFWS called the Yazoo Pumps “ecologically unsound�? and “totally contrary to the Service’s goal for a balance between economic and environmental sustainability in the [Yazoo Backwater Area].�?

The irony of theYazoo pumps project is that it proposes destroying natural flood protection systems in the name of flood control. Wetlands act as natural sponges, storing and slowly releasing floodwaters after peak flood flows have passed. A single acre of wetland, saturated to a depth of one foot, will retain 330,000 gallons of water—enough to flood thirteen average-sized homes thigh-deep. Coastal wetlands also reduce the size and velocity of storm surge during storms and hurricanes. The dramatic loss of these resources in the Yazoo Backwater area will have lasting and unpredictable consequences. For more information, see the USFWS fact sheet on the Yazoo pumps www.fws.gov/southeast/pubs/facts/yazooback.pdf or see our fact sheets on theYazoo pumps.

keep looking »

Welcome Audio

Authors

Categories

Stay Informed via RSS

Archives

River Photos

Blogroll