Testimony of Governor John Hoeven
Army Corps of Engineers Annual Meeting
Bismarck, North Dakota
October 15, 2002
Welcome to North Dakota, and thank you, once again, for giving us an opportunity to voice our concerns regarding management of the Missouri River. Nevertheless, if all the Corps does this evening is hear our concerns - and fail again to change the operations of the Missouri River System to meet the contemporary needs of the basin - our time this evening will have been wasted.
The people of the upper basin are being severely impacted daily by the Army Corps of Engineers' operation of one of North Dakota's most important natural resource, the Missouri River. Wildlife interests, recreational interests, agricultural interests - all have been adversely affected by the Corps' practice of ignoring science and neglecting the public will. You have had nearly everyone, except the downstream special interests, come before you to ask for change. You have had everyone, except the downstream special interests, urge the Corps to be responsible - and responsive - to the people of the Missouri River Basin. Yet time and again, you have shown us only inaction.
I will begin with a discussion of how the Corps' management of the river has created hardship for the people of North Dakota and the basin. I will describe how the Corps has neglected the recommendation of a consensus of basin states, not only in the Master Manual, but most recently in the Annual Operating Plan (AOP). And I will conclude with some specific recommendations that we feel will improve the management of the river, this year and in years to come.
General Fastabend, in his cover letter of the Annual Operating Plan, concludes: "With your help, I trust we can ensure that the System is operated for all Congressionally authorized project purposes, and meets the contemporary needs of the people who benefit from it."
In good faith, North Dakota, along with the other basin states, has been helping for 13 years to develop a plan that meets the modern needs of the basin. Unfortunately, the continuing delays in adopting a revised Master Manual have resulted in yet another inadequate AOP. We have lost faith in the Corps' ability to meet the needs of the entire basin, and to accept the recommendations of nearly all of the basin states in resolving the issue of managing the river.
To illustrate my point, three years ago seven of the Missouri River basin states recommended that the revised Master Manual include conservation measures to equitably share the burden of a drought. Even though the Corps has endlessly delayed the Master Manual revision, there is no excuse for rejecting the implementation of the reasonable conservation measures we proposed in the current AOP.
Last spring, North Dakota and other basin states filed several lawsuits regarding the Corps' operation of the Missouri River. North Dakota's lawsuit asked not only for reasonable conservation measures, but also for completion of the Master Manual revision. On September 17, the Justice Department stated that the Master Manual will probably not be completed in 2003. However, they did indicate that the measures called for in the Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA) of the Biological Opinion may be implemented next year.
As a result of the Justice Department's comments, expectations that the AOP would include realistic conservation measures were raised. These hopes were soon dashed when this unsuitable AOP was released. While we would much rather help the Corps develop a suitable operating plan, we will push forward on all fronts, including our legal actions, to ensure that North Dakota's interests are protected.
Over the last three years runoff above Sioux City has been a combined 20 million acre-feet below normal. As a result the system storage will end the year 12 million acre-feet below normal according to the Corps' October 1 forecast. While the current reservoir levels are critical, another year of drought would prove disastrous. If Lake Sakakawea falls below 1825 during mid- to late summer, oxygen concentrations will be reduced - putting Sakakawea's nationally acclaimed sport fishery in serious jeopardy. Low lake levels will also increase the risk to human health. The Missouri River in North Dakota must be maintained for municipal water supplies and fishery habitat.
Water levels in Lake Oahe are even lower, and the impact on local businesses that depend on the $87 million a year recreation industry in the basin is severe. All this is happening, moreover, at the worst possible time - as North Dakota is preparing to welcome hundreds of thousands of guests for the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial Commemoration. Dry boat ramps, dust devils on the shoreline, and mountains of weeds will leave a very unfavorable lasting impression on visitors, perhaps affecting our tourism industry for years.
Despite these facts, this AOP does not even attempt to address the drought and the resulting economic and water quality issues, as required by the 1944 Flood Control Act.
The AOP should make provisions for dealing with the drought should it continue through the winter and next spring. In fact, there are valid reasons to assume that the drought is not yet over. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) recently reported that the developing El Nino is poised to impact fall and winter weather patterns. Among the impacts of the El Nino, NOAA forecasters expect drier-than average conditions in the northern Rockies - the very area where the mountain snow-pack runoff comes from. Even with normal precipitation, the soil and the many bodies of water - already depleted by three years of drought -- will consume much of the precipitation that does occur. This situation is ominous.
In addition, the AOP states that it relies on a wealth of operational experience, including, "the lessons learned during the six consecutive years of drought of the late 1980's through 1992." But operational experience has shown that additional conservation measures will be necessary if the stored water in the system drops below a certain critical level on July 1 of any given year.
We are disappointed that the Corps has not learned the lessons of the last drought and refuses to implement conservation measures during the current dry period. Less water is being conserved now than during the last drought. This AOP calls for a 5 day shortening of the navigation season with median or lower runoff to offset the additional discharges this winter. By contrast, during the previous drought, the navigation season was shortened by 5 weeks during three of the drought years. This shortening was not called for by the Master Manual but was done for one reason - because it was the right thing to do.
The two sets of simulations in the AOP provide only the illusion that conservation concerns are being addressed. In the past, the Corps has indicated that real conservation measures cannot be implemented because they are not consistent with the Master Manual. In the case of the steady release regulation, however, two separate actions are being proposed that are not consistent with the Manual. The first is not to allow increased discharges from Gavins Point during the nesting season of the terns and plovers. The Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that this may be necessary to prevent the loss of endangered bird species nests.
The second action increases flows above the navigation targets laid out in the Manual to ensure meeting the targets in August. Although the Corps is deviating from the manual to satisfy downstream interests, it refuses to consider needed conservation measures in the upper basin, purportedly because those measures are not in the Manual.
If the steady-release is part of the AOP, efforts should be made to offset the additional discharges it will require. The navigation season should be shortened at the beginning of the season to save water in the reservoirs. When the birds have completed nesting, the actual amount of excess water discharged can be calculated and the season shortened to make up for the remaining increase in discharge. This represents genuine conservation with equity. Conserving water up front reduces the risk of long-term damage caused by implementing the steady-release regulation, which will harm our fishery if it is implemented without conservation measures.
We propose the following as a way to meet the authorized project purposes and the contemporary needs of the basin, as well as a way to equitably distribute the hardships of the ongoing drought:
- First, implement the conservation measures described in the Modified Conservation Plan (MCP) alternative of the Master Manual, including a shortened navigation season and minimum service levels and other conservation measures. These measures were developed through years of collaboration by the basin states. They were agreed to by seven of the eight states as a way to equitably share the burdens of a drought, and to conserve water so that it is available for all uses as the drought continues.
- Second, since we are in the third year of drought and no meaningful conservation measures have yet been implemented, implement additional conservation measures beyond the MCP alternative. These should include staying at minimum navigation service level through next year.
- Third, reduce the impacts to the threatened and endangered species of birds by maintaining a steady or falling river during the nesting season. Any releases that are needed to support this higher initial level should be offset by shortening the navigation season.
- Fourth, the AOP should direct that operations be changed if the Corps issues a new Master Manual.
We appreciate your coming to North Dakota to hear our concerns, and we encourage you to continue to do so. It is vitally important that the impacts to the entire basin be considered when developing the AOP, especially when water is in short supply. We hope next year brings above normal runoff, but frankly, we do not expect that. Consequently, this AOP must be modified to equitably share the effects of the ongoing drought.
As General Fastabend requested, we have tried to help with your stated goals, which are to operate the Missouri River for all authorized project purposes and to respect the contemporary needs of the basin. We expect the Corps to modify the AOP as necessary to meet these goals. If the Corps does not take the actions necessary to meet the legitimate needs of the basin, our state will take whatever legal, political, legislative and administrative actions necessary to ensure that North Dakota's interests are respected and met.
