Monday, July 11, 2011

Ag secretary questions Corps on Missouri flooding

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has taken the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to task for its handling of the Missouri River in a letter questioning its decision not to release more water from dams earlier in the spring to prevent prolonged flooding this summer. The river is near historic flood levels along the more than 800 miles it stretches from the Gavins Point Dam in South Dakota to its confluence with the Mississippi River. More than 560,000 acres in seven states have flooded, including nearly 447,000 acres of farmland, Vilsack spokesman Justin DeJong said. The flooding followed unexpected spring rains and the melting of a deep snowpack in the Rocky Mountains. Vilsack outlined his concerns in a three-page letter sent to Major Gen. Meredith W.B. Temple, the acting commander of the Corps, and obtained by The Associated Press. Although Vilsack said he wasn't in a position to judge how the Corps handled its dams, he asked pointed questions about the agency's decision not to release more water earlier and criticized it for not providing farmers and ranchers with more up-to-date information. His comments add to a growing chorus of officials questioning the Corps' handling of the situation. U.S. Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., announced Friday that a bipartisan group of 14 senators from Missouri River states has requested a Senate hearing on the Corps' management of the river, and the AP obtained a letter earlier this week in which Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad expressed frustration with the Corps even before the latest flooding and urged the governors of Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska to join him in discussing the formation of a new group of downstream states...more

Remember what a Corps biologist said, as related in Joe Herring's The Purposeful Flooding of America's Heartland :

Greg Pavelka, a wildlife biologist with the Corps of Engineers in Yankton, SD, told the Seattle Times that this event will leave the river in a "much more natural state than it has seen in decades," describing the epic flooding as a "prolonged headache for small towns and farmers along its path, but a boon for endangered species." He went on to say, "The former function of the river is being restored in this one-year event. In the short term, it could be detrimental, but in the long term it could be very beneficial."

I hope Mr. Pavelka has the opportunity to testify at the Senate hearing.

1 comment:

John R. Dykers, Jr. said...

Key words: unexpected spring rains.
Suppose there had been drought and that stored water had been needed to maintain river flow?
Renews my question: How great an engineering feat would be needed to divert part of the flow of the lower Mississippi into the headwaters of rivers in East Texas or even farther west?
John Dykers