Sen. Talent's Weekly Column - Missouri River Debate Should be Held in the Court of Common Sense

By Senator Jim Talent

The Missouri River is a tremendous source of pride for our state.  This majestic watershed drains one-sixth of the United States and encompasses 529,350 square miles, flowing 2,341 miles downstream from the Rocky Mountains through the Great Plains to its confluence with the Mississippi River in St. Louis.  

For generations, local farmers, residents and businesses have depended on the river for their lives and livelihoods.  They understand that they have a special responsibility to be good stewards of the river and to use its resources in an environmentally-sensitive way.  Unfortunately, a lower federal court judge and some environmental groups want to change this. 

Last week, Judge Gladys Kessler of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (the lower federal court to which Miguel Estrada has been nominated) became the latest to cave to pressure applied by extreme environmental groups who insist the courts and public officials must choose between endangered species and Missouri jobs.

At issue is the long debate over the flow of the Missouri River and a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS) proposal to reverse the naturally high flow of the Missouri River during the summer.  The high flow, which produces a nine-foot channel, is necessary to maintain barge traffic to transport fertilizer upstream during spring and summer months and grain downstream in the fall after harvest.  The state's river economy and thousands of Missouri jobs depend on this barge transportation.

The USFWS and environmental groups argue that lower summer flows are needed to protect two birds and a fish - the endangered least tern, piping plover and pallid sturgeon - claiming that by changing the river's flow, to the detriment of Missouri's towns and farmers along the river, there is a greater chance for fish spawning and bird nesting.  They found a friend in a lower federal court who ruled in their favor, ordering alteration of the river flow, using the Endangered Species Act as justification.

In its opinion, the court acknowledged that their decision would hurt the economy, degrade water quality and raise the cost of water purification.  What if failed to acknowledge is the recent science that has shown that the least tern and pallid sturgeon have rebounded significantly, particularly along the Missouri River.

Last year, the number of piping plover on the Missouri River exceeded the recovery objective set by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.  Additionally, the count of least tern exceeds the overall recovery objective of 7000 adult birds by at least several thousand.  In respect to the pallid sturgeon, there is no compelling case that substantiates the claim that higher river levels will increase fish spawning.

The Endangered Species Act is a good thing, but it was never intended to needlessly cost jobs, waste resources and degrade the quality of human life.  An artificially low flow would reduce water transportation on both the Missouri River and the Mississippi River and would increase traffic on our already overburdened rail and road transportation systems, putting more lives at risk.  One 15-barge tow can carry the same cargo as 870 trucks and the presence of water transportation helps businesses to reduce their costs and save jobs.  The proposed flow change could leave farmers and shippers without this option, causing serious economic damage to our state.  

Judge Kessler's decision simply defies common sense.  Moreover, it stands in contrast to a higher federal appeals court that said the Army Corps of Engineers must keep enough water in the lower Missouri to allow for navigation, power generation and other needs.

As disappointing as the court's decision was, this debate is a long way from over.  To help with Missouri's efforts, the Bush Administration last week announced it is adding $42 million to the budget for the Missouri River for next year for the creation of habitat, assessing species population and improving hatcheries.  Meanwhile, the Army Corps of Engineers' decision to resume discussions about the river's management effectively postpones the action recommended by the lower federal court.

We can protect Missouri jobs, farmers and our economic interests while continuing to safeguard the environment and endangered species.  Senator Bond in particular has been successful in these efforts.   I will oppose any plan by the USFWS or the Corps that puts the lives and jobs of Missourians at risk, and I will continue to work with the Administration and Sen. Bond to resolve this dispute.

Senator Jim Talent (R-Mo.) was elected to serve Missouri in the U.S. Senate in November 2002.  Previously he served in the U.S. House of Representatives (1993-2001) and the Missouri House (1985-1992).  He serves on the Senate Agriculture Committee and the Energy and Natural Resources Committee.