H.R. 3480 and H.R.

3606

LEGISLATIVE HEARING
BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND POWER

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION

March 7, 2002

Serial No. 107-90

Printed for the use of the Committee on Resources

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/house

or
Committee address: http://resourcescommittee.house.gov

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

78-048 PS WASHINGTON : 2002

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 5121800; DC area (202) 5121800
Fax: (202) 5122250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 204020001

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah, Chairman
NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia, Ranking Democrat Member
Don Young, Alaska, George Miller, California
Vice Chairman Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts
W.J. Billy Tauzin, Louisiana Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
Jim Saxton, New Jersey Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
Elton Gallegly, California Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American Samoa
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
Joel Hefley, Colorado Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
Ken Calvert, California Calvin M. Dooley, California
Scott McInnis, Colorado Robert A. Underwood, Guam
Richard W. Pombo, California Adam Smith, Washington
Barbara Cubin, Wyoming Donna M. Christensen, Virgin Islands
George Radanovich, California Ron Kind, Wisconsin
Walter B. Jones, Jr., North Carolina Jay Inslee, Washington
Mac Thornberry, Texas Grace F. Napolitano, California
Chris Cannon, Utah Tom Udall, New Mexico
John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania Mark Udall, Colorado
Bob Schaffer, Colorado Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
Jim Gibbons, Nevada James P. McGovern, Massachusetts
Mark E. Souder, Indiana Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
Greg Walden, Oregon Hilda L. Solis, California
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho Brad Carson, Oklahoma
Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado Betty McCollum, Minnesota
J.D. Hayworth, Arizona
C.L. Butch Otter, Idaho
Tom Osborne, Nebraska
Jeff Flake, Arizona
Dennis R. Rehberg, Montana

Tim Stewart, Chief of Staff

Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel/Deputy Chief of Staff
Steven T. Petersen, Deputy Chief Counsel
Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk
James H. Zoia, Democrat Staff Director
Jeffrey P. Petrich, Democrat Chief Counsel

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND POWER

KEN CALVERT, California, Chairman
ADAM SMITH, Washington, Ranking Democrat Member
Richard W. Pombo, California George Miller, California
George Radanovich, California Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
Greg Walden, Oregon, Calvin M. Dooley, California
Vice Chairman Grace F. Napolitano, California
Michael K. Simpson, Idaho James P. McGovern, Massachusetts
J.D. Hayworth, Arizona Hilda L. Solis, California
C.L. Butch Otter, Idaho Brad Carson, Oklahoma
Tom Osborne, Nebraska
Jeff Flake, Arizona

(II)

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 C O N T E N T S

Page
Hearing held on March 7, 2002 .............................................................................. 1
Statement of Members:
Kind, Hon. Ron, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Wisconsin ....................................................................................................... 8
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480 ........................................................... 11
Walden, Hon. Greg, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Oregon ............................................................................................................ 2
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480 and H.R. 3606 ................................. 2
Statement of Witnesses:
Daigle, Doug, Hypoxia Program Director, Mississippi River Basin
Alliance .......................................................................................................... 28
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480 ........................................................... 30
Hirsch, Dr. Robert M., Associate Director for Water, U.S. Geological
Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior .................................................... 5
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480 ........................................................... 6
Keys, John W. III, Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation, U.S.
Department of the Interior ........................................................................... 3
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480 ........................................................... 4
McLachlan, John A., Ph.D., Weatherhead Distinguished Professor of
Environmental Studies, Professor of Pharmacology, Director, Center
for Bioenvironmental Research, Tulane and Xavier Universities ............ 36
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480 ........................................................... 38
McMillen, Morton D., Principal Engineer, Montgomery Watson Harza ...... 17
Prepared statement on H.R. 3606 ........................................................... 19
Schnoor, Jerald L., Ph.D., P.E., DEE, Professor, Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Co-Director, Center for Global and Regional
Environmental Research, The University of Iowa ..................................... 24
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480 ........................................................... 26
Stoerker, Holly, Executive Director, Upper Mississippi River Basin
Association ..................................................................................................... 32
Prepared statement on H.R. 3480 ........................................................... 34
Additional materials supplied:
Foster, The Honorable M.J. Mike, Governor, State of Louisiana, et al.,
Letter submitted for the record ................................................................... 13
Hulshof, The Honorable Kenny, and The Honorable Leonard Boswell.
Letter submitted for the record on H.R. 3480 ........................................... 10

(III)

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 3480, TO PRO-
MOTE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
EFFORTS TO PROVIDE A SCIENTIFIC BASIS
FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF SEDIMENT AND
NUTRIENT LOSS IN THE UPPER
MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN; AND H.R. 3606,
TO AUTHORIZE THE BUREAU OF RECLAMA-
TION TO PARTICIPATE IN THE REHABILITA-
TION OF THE WALLOWA LAKE DAM IN
OREGON, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

Thursday, March 7, 2002

U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Water and Power
Committee on Resources
Washington, DC

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room

1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Greg Walden, pre-
siding.
Mr. WALDEN. Good morning. We commence the hearing on
H.R. 3480, to promote the Department of the Interior efforts to
provide a scientific basis for the management of sediment and nu-
trient loss in the Upper Mississippi Basin and H.R. 3606, to au-
thorize the Bureau of Reclamation to participate in the rehabilita-
tion of the Wallowa Lake Dam in Oregon, and for other purposes.
Mr. WALDEN. Under Rule 4B of the Committee rules, any oral
opening statements at hearings are limited to the Chairman and
the Ranking Minority Member. If other members have statements,
they can be included in the hearing record under unanimous con-
sent, if any members disagree with thatgood.
[Laughter.]
Mr. WALDEN. The Chairman will recognize the Ranking Minority
Member, Mr. Kind, when he comes to give his opening statement,
but I understand that several of the witnesses are on pretty tight
schedules this morning, so, in concurrence with the minority staff,
we have agreed to proceed, and I will do that.
(1)

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 2
STATEMENT OF THE HON. GREG WALDEN, A
REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OREGON
Mr. WALDEN. So what Id like to do now is give a brief opening
statement and submit my full statement for the record.
Today, we hold a legislative hearing on two bills, as I have men-
tioned. The first is the Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection
Act of 2001, which provides for the Department of Interior and U.S.
Geological Survey to supplement, coordinate, and manage data col-
lection on sediments and nutrients in the Upper Mississippi River
Basin and use the data to perform computer modeling to provide
the baseline data and modeling tools needed to make scientifically
sound and cost-effective management decisions.
The other legislation deals with the issue in Wallowa County Or-
egon of the Wallowa Lake Dam, which was built in 1918, I believe,
and it is about 35 feet tall. It was reconstructed in the 1920s. In
1996, the Wallowa Lake Dam was listed as a high-hazard structure
by the Oregon Water Resources Department of Dam Safety.
A sudden failure and release of water would most certainly result
in loss of life and property, as well as severe environmental and
economic damage to the communities that lie downstream. In fact,
the dam has been holding water at less than the maximum author-
ized pool level since 1970.
So this is one that, clearly, we are trying to find a way to get
some help on, and I know others have been assisting in that way
as well.
In addition, the improvements that they have recommended here
would help both improve water quality, streamflows and meet
other problems in the local area, including trust obligations to the
Nez Perce Tribe.
So I will put my full statement into the record.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Walden follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Greg Walden, Vice Chair, Subcommittee on
Water and Power, on H.R. 3480 and H.R. 3606
Today we will hold a legislative hearing on two bills,
H.R. 3480, the Upper Mississippi River Protection Act of 2001, and
H.R. 3603, the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management Act of
2001
First, H.R. 3480, the Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act of 2001, pro-
vides for the Department of the Interior, U. S. Geological Survey to supplement, co-
ordinate and manage data collection on sediments and nutrients in the Upper
Mississippi River Basin and use the data to perform computer modeling to provide
the baseline data and modeling tools needed to make scientifically-sound and cost-
effective river management decisions. The legislation includes a provision requiring
landowner permission prior to disseminating information from monitoring stations
located on private lands to protect the privacy of individual landowners. Finally, it
provides for the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences to
conduct a comprehensive water resources assessment of the Upper Mississippi River
Basin.
Second, H.R. 3606, the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Manage-
ment Act of 2001.
Before we hear from our witnesses, I now recognize the gentleman from Wis-
consin, Mr. Kind, the first bills sponsor to further discuss the bill.

Mr. WALDEN. And with that I would like to welcome our wit-
nesses, Mr. Keys and Dr. Hirsch, and would welcome your com-
ments at this time.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 3

We will start with Mr. Keys. Good morning and welcome to the
Committee.
STATEMENT OF JOHN W. KEYS, III, COMMISSIONER, BUREAU
OF RECLAMATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. KEYS. Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to be here and talk
with you about the H.R. 3606, the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilita-
tion and Water Management Act. I would ask that my full written
statement be made part of the record for this hearing.
Mr. WALDEN. Without objection.
Mr. KEYS. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 3606 would authorize Reclama-
tion to participate in the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and
Water Management Program in Oregon, near Joseph, Oregon. The
proposed bill sets out an 80/20 cost-share arrangement for this pro-
gram, with the Governments share of $32 million to be funded by
the Bureau of Reclamation.
While we believe that there are merits to the proposed program,
the Department does not support H.R. 3606.
Wallowa Lake Dam is a privately owned dam constructed in
1918 and raised in 1929. It is owned and operated by the Associ-
ated Ditch Companies in Oregon. Dam safety deficiencies have
been identified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Or-
egon Water Resources Department. Associated Ditch Companies or-
ganized and led a partnership composed of the Grande Ronde
Model Watershed Council, Reclamation, and other local, county and
State agencies in developing the four-phased plan for the program
or the act. They did that to address dam safety deficiencies and to
the correction of these deficiencies to encourage larger environ-
mental issues in the Wallowa River Basin.
The proposed act would begin construction in Fiscal Year 2002
and continue through the Fiscal Year 2007, at an estimated cost
of almost $39 million. The act calls for the Federal Government to
provide $32 million of that program cost.
While we fully understand the importance of ensuring the safety
of the Wallowa Lake Dam, this damn is not a Federal project. It
is a privately owned and operated facility, and it falls under the
Dam Safety Program of the Oregon Department of Water Re-
sources.
Reclamation believes that the Wallowa Lake Dam program is
worthwhile, with potential numerous benefits to the environment,
to the fish and so forth and to the dam itself. However, we are con-
cerned about the proposed Federal role in the project.
Despite the very high Federal cost share for the project, under
H.R. 3606, there is no Federal interest in the dam and none is pro-
vided by the bill. Moreover, there is no provision for repayment by
project beneficiaries in accordance with Reclamation law.
Finally, Reclamation was not involved in the preparation of the
Phase I engineering document defined in the bill, and we have not
had the opportunity to review the designs of that proposed plan.
Mr. Chairman, we are also concerned that Reclamations partici-
pation in this program would adversely impact ongoing projects
and operations of Reclamation. H.R. 3606 would authorize the use
of Reclamation funds for a non-Federal purpose. Reclamation funds
must be targeted to perform essential functions at our Federal

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 4

projects, such as the Bureau of Reclamations own Safety of Dams

program, security of our facilities, operation and maintenance,
resource management and construction.
In summary, the Department of Interior cannot, therefore, sup-
port H.R. 3606. Mr. Chairman, that concludes my oral comments.
I would certainly be glad to answer any questions that you might
have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Keys follows:]
Statement of John W. Keys, III, Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation,
U.S. Department of the Interior, on H.R. 3606
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: I am John Keys, Commissioner
of the Bureau of Reclamation. I appreciate the opportunity to present the Depart-
ments views on H.R. 3606, a bill that would authorize Reclamation to participate
in the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management Program in Or-
egon. H.R. 3606 sets out an 80/20 cost share for this Program, under which the
Federal Government would pay $32 million funded through the Bureau of Reclama-
tion.
While we believe there are merits to the proposed program, the Department does
not support H.R. 3606.
Wallowa Lake Dam is a privately-owned dam constructed in 1918 and raised in
1929, and is owned and operated by the Associated Ditch Companies, Inc. (ADC).
Dam safety deficiencies have been identified by the US Army Corps of Engineers
and Oregon Water Resources Department. ADC, in conjunction with the Grande
Ronde Model Watershed Council, Reclamation, and other local, state, and Federal
agencies, developed the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management
Program to address dam safety deficiencies and to tie correction of those deficiencies
to larger environmental issues in the Wallowa River Basin.
The Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management Program is pro-
posed to begin in Fiscal Year 2002 and continue through Fiscal Year 2007, at an
estimated total cost of $38,800,000. Under H.R. 3606, the Federal Government
would provide funding of $32,000,000.
Reclamation itself has an inventory of aging damsand the responsibility to en-
sure the safety and reliability of Reclamation dams to protect the downstream pub-
lic. Dam safety is one of Reclamations highest priorities. I would like to give you
a sense of the scope of our dam safety responsibilities: the Bureau has reservoirs
impounded by 457 dams and dikes. Of these structures, 362 dams and dikes, located
at 252 different project facilities, would likely cause loss of life if they were to fail.
Approximately 50 percent of Reclamations dams were built between 1900 and 1950,
and about 90 percent of the dams were built before currently-used state of the art
design and construction practices. Aging Reclamation-owned dams, which lack state-
of-the-art structural reliability features, require Reclamation to conduct extensive
ongoing risk management activities to assure safe dam performance and protect the
public from unreasonable risk.
While we fully understand the importance of ensuring the safety of Wallowa Lake
Dam, this dam is not a Federal project. It is privately owned and operated, and falls
under a dam safety program of the Oregon Department of Water Resources. Rec-
lamation believes the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management
Program is worthwhile, with potentially numerous benefits; however we are con-
cerned about the proposed Federal role in this project. Despite the very high Federal
cost share for the project, under H.R. 3606 there is currently no Federal interest
in the dam, and none is provided by the bill; moreover, there is no provision for re-
payment by project beneficiaries in accordance with reclamation law, and, finally,
Reclamation was not involved in the preparation of the Phase I engineering docu-
ment defined in section 2(3) of the bill nor have we reviewed it.
We are also concerned that Reclamations participation in this program would ad-
versely impact ongoing projects and operations. H.R. 3606 would authorize the use
of Reclamation funds for a nonFederal purpose. Reclamation funds must be tar-
geted to perform essential functions at our Federal projects, such as security at BOR
dams and reservoirs, operations and maintenance (O&M), resource management,
dam safety, or construction. The Department cannot, therefore, support H.R. 3606.

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you, Mr. Keys.

Dr. Hirsch?

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 5
STATEMENT OF ROBERT M. HIRSCH, Ph.D., ASSOCIATE
DIRECTOR FOR WATER, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. HIRSCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and mem-
bers of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to provide
the views of the Department of Interior on H.R. 3480, the Upper
Mississippi River Basin Protection Act of 2001.
The administration agrees with the goals of H.R. 3480, and we
especially appreciate the bipartisan efforts of the sponsors of the
bill to address this important issue. We also appreciate the empha-
sis that the bill places on sound science. However, the administra-
tion has concerns about the financial resources that would be re-
quired for the U.S. Geological Survey to carry out the provisions of
the bill.
The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the
United States Geological Survey, to provide a scientific basis for
the management of sediment and nutrient loss in the Upper
Mississippi River Basin. This would be accomplished through a
sediment and nutrient monitoring network; research and modeling
that relates to sediment and nutrient losses to landscape, land use
and land management characteristics; technical assistance regard-
ing data collection; and dissemination of information to managers,
scientists and the public.
The role identified in the bill for the USGS is consistent with our
leadership role in monitoring, interpretation, research, and assess-
ment of the health and status of the water and biological resources
of the Nation. As the Nations largest water, earth, and biological
science and civilian mapping agency, the USGS has been active in
a number of programs of great significance to the Upper
Mississippi River Basin. Let me briefly review these ongoing pro-
grams.
The USGS is an active participant in the Mississippi River-Gulf
of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force. This Task Force, which
has representation from Federal agencies, and State and Tribal
Governments in the basin, is charged with fulfilling requirements
of The Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control
Act of 1998, by preparing a plan for controlling hypoxia in the
Northern Gulf of Mexico, and improving water quality throughout
the Mississippi River Basin.
The USGS has a lead role in the preparation of a science report
of the task force that defines what is currently known about nutri-
ent sources and transport in the Mississippi River Basin. This is
a baseline from which future water quality trends and improve-
ments will be made.
The USGS has offices in each of the five Upper Mississippi River
Basin States. These offices have a long history of conducting water
quality and quantity monitoring and assessment activities within
the basin. Existing USGS programs involved in this effort include
the National Water Quality Assessment Program, the National
Stream Quality Accounting Network, the National Streamflow In-
formation Program, the Toxic Substances Hydrology Program, the
Water Resources Research Act Program, and the Cooperative
Water Program, as well as reimbursable programs that we operate,

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 6

such as the Long-Term Resource Monitoring Program funded by

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
For the past 20 years, the USGS Upper Midwest Environmental
Sciences Center, known as UMESC, in La Crosse, Wisconsin, has
provided research support in the Upper Mississippi River Basin to
Department of Interior Agencies and to the U.S. Army Corps of En-
gineers to address complex issues of navigation, contaminants and
other natural resource concerns.
More recently, the Center has developed an active partnership
with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service on sedi-
ment and nutrient concerns of the agencies. For 15 years, the
UMESC has provided the scientific and management leadership for
the Long-Term Resource Monitoring Program of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers Environmental Management Program for the
Upper Mississippi River Basin main stem rivers. This monitoring
program of water quality, fisheries, vegetation, land use, and other
critical indicators of river health is the largest main stem river as-
sessment program in the Nation.
H.R. 3480 acknowledges the need to use all existing monitoring
and science programs of the USGS and others while identifying in-
formation needs in the Upper Mississippi River Basin. These exist-
ing programs can help to define how water quality conditions are
affected by human activities and natural climatic variations. This
is a necessary step in understanding how management actions will
improve water quality conditions in the Mississippi River Basin.
The provisions of H.R. 3480 are consistent with Gulf of Mexico
Watershed Nutrient Task Force recommendations with regard to
science and management activities. The proposed legislation de-
scribes a program consistent with current USGS activities. The
goals of the bill are commendable, and the bill contains provisions
that are well within the scope and expertise of the USGS. However,
funding for the activities of H.R. 3480 is not included in the Fiscal
Year 2003 Presidents budget proposal.
One concern we would like to express is that we believe that the
cost-sharing provisions of this bill should conform with other simi-
lar programs, such as the USGS Cooperative Water Program,
which requires a dollar-per-dollar match of Federal and non-Fed-
eral funds.
On a personal note, I would like to say that I have had the good
fortune to participate in the USGS research crews on the Upper
Mississippi River, and I am very proud of the monitoring, mod-
eling, and research that we have conducted, as the Mississippi
River and its basin is one of the Nations unique natural resources.
Developing the scientific knowledge that is needed to help manage
this resource is a welcome challenge for the scientists at the USGS.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to present this
testimony, and I will be pleased to answer any questions you or
other members might have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hirsch follows:]
Statement of Robert M. Hirsch, Associate Director for Water,
U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior, on H.R. 3480
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity
to provide the views of the Department of the Interior (DOI) on H.R. 3480, the
Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act of 2001. The Administration agrees

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 7
with the goals of H.R. 3480; we especially appreciate the bi-partisan efforts of the
sponsors of the bill to address this important issue and emphasis within the bill on
the need for reliance on sound science. The Administration has concerns about the
financial resources that would be required for the United States Geological Survey
(USGS) to carry out this bill in the context of the availability of resources overall
for Administration programs. Further, some provisions of the bill may be duplicative
of existing Federal and State programs.
The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the United States Ge-
ological Survey, to provide a scientific basis for the management of sediment and
nutrient loss in the Upper Mississippi River. This would be accomplished through
establishing a sediment and nutrient monitoring network that builds on existing
monitoring activities; conducting research and modeling that relates sediment and
nutrient losses to landscape, land use and land management characteristics; pro-
viding technical assistance regarding use of consistent and reliable methods for data
collection; and instituting a program to disseminate new information to managers,
scientists and the public.
The role identified for DOI in this bill is consistent with USGSs leadership role
in monitoring, interpretation, research, and assessment of the health and status of
the water and biological resources of the Nation. As the Nations largest water,
earth, and biological science, and civilian mapping agency, USGS conducts the larg-
est single non-regulatory ambient water-quality monitoring activity in the Nation.
Furthermore, the USGS has been active in a number of programs and investigations
that involve the Upper Mississippi River Basin (UMRB) specifically.
The USGS is an active participant in the Mississippi River, Gulf of Mexico Water-
shed Nutrient Task Force. This Task Force, which has representation from Federal
agencies, and State and Tribal governments in the basin, is charged with fulfilling
requirements of The Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act
of 1998, by preparing a plan for controlling hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico,
and shares a common goal of improving water-quality conditions in the Mississippi
River Basin.
The USGS also has had a lead role in the preparation of a science report that
uses available water-quality information to define a recent baseline condition for nu-
trient sources and loads in the Mississippi River Basina baseline from which fu-
ture water-quality trends and improvements will be measured. This report identifies
those parts of the Upper Mississippi River Basin that have the highest nutrient
yields.
The USGS has offices in each of the five Upper Mississippi River Basin States.
These offices have a long history of conducting water-quantity and water-quality
monitoring and assessment activities within the basin. Existing USGS programs in-
clude the National WaterQuality Assessment Program, the National Stream Qual-
ity Accounting Network, the National Streamflow Information Program, the Toxic
Substances Hydrology Program, the Water Resources Research Act Program, and
the Cooperative Water Program, as well as reimbursable programs we operate, such
as the LongTerm Resource Monitoring Program funded by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers. These programs currently provide information on nutrients and sedi-
ment within the basin.
For the past 20 years, the USGS Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center
(UMESC) in La Crosse, Wisconsin has provided research support in the Upper
Mississippi River Basin to Department of the Interior agencies and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers to address complex issues of navigation, contaminants, and other
natural resource concerns. More recently, this Center has developed an active part-
nership with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service on sediment and
nutrient concerns of the agencies. For 15 years, the UMESC has provided the sci-
entific and management leadership for the Long-term Resource Monitoring Program
of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Management Program for the
Upper Mississippi River Basin main stem rivers. This monitoring program of water
quality, fisheries, vegetation, land use, and other critical indicators of river health
is the largest main stem river assessment program in the Nation.
The USGS conducts monitoring activities in cooperation with many States and
local governments in the Upper Mississippi River Basin. The USGS is also active
in hydrologic and water-quality studies in the Lower Mississippi River Basin. The
continuity of research is important from the standpoint of developing a complete as-
sessment of the entire Mississippi River basin. To this end, the USGS has begun
a partnership this year with the Long-term Estuary Assessment Group, centered at
Tulane University.
H.R. 3480 acknowledges the need to use all existing monitoring and science pro-
grams of the USGS and others while identifying information needs in the Upper
Mississippi River Basin. Existing programs and development of models are tools for

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 8
defining how water-quality conditions are affected by human activities and natural
climatic variations and how management actions may best improve water-quality
conditions at a wide range of scales from small watersheds to the Mississippi River
Basin.
Furthermore, the bill would authorize integration of activities conducted in co-
operation with other Federal partners and would emphasize and expand the existing
USGS coordination and assistance to State monitoring programs. For example, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (FWS) Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program re-
stores wetland habitat in watersheds across the country, including the Upper
Mississippi River Basin. The FWS is available to apply its expertise to the reduction
of sediment and nutrient loss in the basin through participation in demonstration
projects, technical assistance, and working groups. We recognize the need to ensure
that future monitoring activities complement and do not duplicate State monitoring
activities.
The provisions of H.R. 3480 are consistent with Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutri-
ent Task Force recommendations with regard to science and management activities.
The proposed legislation describes a program consistent with current USGS activi-
ties to support protection of the UMRB.
In summary, the goals of the bill are commendable, and the bill contains provi-
sions that are within the scope and expertise of the USGS, and that may be met
by other on-going programs. However, funding for the activities in H.R. 3480 is not
included in the Fiscal Year 2003 Presidents Budget proposal and would remain sub-
ject to available resources. Also, there are several provisions of the bill with which
we have concerns. We believe that the cost-sharing provisions of this bill should con-
form with other similar programs, such as the USGS Cooperative Water Program
which requires a dollar for dollar match of Federal and nonFederal funds.
We welcome the opportunity to discuss with the Committee the matters of concern
to us and ways to best achieve the important purposes of the bill. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman, for the opportunity to present this testimony. I will be pleased to answer
questions you and other members of the Subcommittee might have.

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you very much, Doctor.

Now I would like to extend the opportunity for Mr. Kind, who
has joined us, to give us an opening statement, if you would like,
and then we will take questions.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. RON KIND, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN
Mr. KIND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have a written state-
ment I would like to submit for the record, without objection.
Mr. WALDEN. Without objection.
Mr. KIND. Thank you.
I thank you, Director Hirsch, for your willingness to come and
testify in regards to the legislation and all of the witnesses who
have been called to testify before the Committee today.
I would also like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member
of this Committee, Mr. Calvert and Mr. Smith, for their willingness
to hold the hearing, as well as the Chair and Ranking Member of
the Full Committee, and the staff for working closely with us on
refining and fine-tuning the legislation, it is very much appre-
ciated, as well as Mr. Tauzin and his staff, who had some sugges-
tions on how we can improve the legislation.
Mr. Chairman, this bill that was reintroduced in December, it
has actually been pending before this Committee, this Congress for
the last few years. It has been a personal quest of mine since I be-
came a Member of Congress a few years ago to do everything that
I can with my colleagues to better preserve and protect one of the
great natural treasures that exist in the country, the Upper
Mississippi River Basin, and the huge impact that it has not only

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 9

on the communities directly in the basin, but the entire country as

a whole.
When you look at the Mississippi River Basin, what you are real-
ly talking about is everything west of the Appalachian Mountains
and everything east of the Rocky Mountains. It encompasses a geo-
graphic area of roughly 40 percent of the continental United States,
and locally, the Upper Mississippi region, has about a $1.2-billion
recreation impact, a $6.6-billion economic. It is also the primary
drinking water source for 22 million Americans, and it is the larg-
est migratory route in North America, with roughly 40 percent of
the water fowl flying down and flying back up again the
Mississippi River corridor.
But there is a lot of concern, for those of us who are familiar
with the river and from the experts who I have talked to in regards
to the sustainability of the river basin as a whole. If you talk to
the experts, and we have some of those witnesses here today, they
say one of the chief challenges that we face in regards to maintain-
ing the sustainability of the river is being able to better track the
sediment and nutrients that flow into the river basin.
This stuff has adversely affected this very valuable ecosystem by
filling in back bays, by ruining natural habitat, by the flow that is
occurring in the Upper Mississippi region, the impact it also has
in the Southern region, and that is what 3480 is meant to address.
It is trying to put the science in place, where we can develop
comprehensive monitoring, a network between the Federal, State
and local agencies, and developing a private-public partnership and
doing a better job of monitoring what is happening in the system,
and then developing the computer models so that we know what
is taking place and then what best practices, best management
plan can be put in place to better protect the river basin as a
whole.
It has been a work in progress, a collaborative effort. The other
thing that I did as a new Member of Congress was help form a
Mississippi River Bipartisan Task Force, a Caucus. I have a letter
from the two current chairs of the task force, Kenny Hulshof and
Len Boswell, in support of the legislation, that I would like to in-
troduce for the record, at this time.
Mr. WALDEN. Without objection.
[The letter from Messrs. Hulshof and Boswell follows:]

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 10

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 11

Mr. KIND. And also what we are proposing in this legislation is

consistent with the work that has been taking place with the Hy-
poxia Task Force and their current action plan.
In fact, I also have a letter from a variety of Governors of the
States along the Mississippi River Louisiana, Missouri, Arkan-
sas, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Minnesotasupporting the goals
of the task force and the action plan in place. In fact, in their letter
they indicate, To succeed, this effort will require an extensive pro-
gram that is supported by States and funded and coordinated by
the Federal Government.
They also go on to state in the letter, A parallel monitoring ef-
fort conducted jointly by USGS and the States is required within
the basin to determine the water quality effects of the actions
taken and to measure the success of efforts on a sub-basin and
project level.
That is, I would submit, entirely consistent with the goals and
the objective of this legislation. When it was reintroduced in De-
cember, we had seventeen original co-sponsors, nine Ds and eight
Rs, which shows the broad bipartisan support that the legislation
has. I am not aware of any colleague in Congress that opposes the
legislation or any group outside who opposes the legislation or any
group outside who opposes the legislation. In fact, we have worked
very closely with a whole host of groups and agencies to determine
what the best course of action would be.
So I thank the Committee again for the opportunity to hold a
hearing on this important piece of legislation and the witnesses
who have come to testify, and I look forward to hearing your testi-
mony.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kind follows:]
Statement of The Honorable Ron Kind, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Wisconsin, on H.R. 3480
Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee for the opportunity
to comment on H.R. 3480, the Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act. While
I have spoken before this Subcommittee on similar legislation in the 106th Con-
gress, H.R. 3480 is a much more focused bill, specifically designed to enhance exist-
ing monitoring programs on the Upper Mississippi River Basin, and provide reliable,
scientific data for targeting future nutrient and sediment reduction efforts.
The Upper Mississippi River system, whose tributaries and basin encompass
much of Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, and Missouri, is widely recognized as
one of our nations great multi-use natural resources. While the Mississippi River
and its tributaries provide drinking water to approximately 22 million Americans,
the systems 1,300 navigable miles transport millions of tons of commercial cargo
via barges. In addition, 40% of North Americas waterfowl use the wetlands and
backwaters of the main stem as a migratory flyway, illustrating the environmental
significance of the system as well as recreation capabilities. Overall, the Upper
Mississippi River Basin provides $1.2 billion annually in recreation income and $6.6
billion to the areas tourism industries.
Unfortunately, high sediment and nutrient levels threaten the health of the river
system and the vast recreational, agricultural, and industrial activities it supports.
Sediment fills the main shipping channel of the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Riv-
ers, costing over $100 million each year to dredge. Nutrient inputs degrade water
quality in the Upper Mississippi River system and impact far downstream to the
Gulf of Mexico.
As a basis for making effective decisions for improving water quality, accurate
data must be available. Building the nutrient and sediment monitoring system that
provides this data will require extensive communication and coordination between
government agencies at the Federal, state, and local levels, as well as other stake-
holders. By utilizing existing monitoring programs to the maximum extent possible,

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 12
H.R. 3480 builds upon existing efforts by authorizing the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) to coordinate and integrate these efforts, expand where necessary, develop
guidelines for data collection and storage, and establish an electronic database sys-
tem to store and disseminate information. USGS would also establish a state-of-the-
art computer modeling program to identify significant nutrient and sediment
sources, at the subwatershed level, to better target reduction efforts. In addition,
H.R. 3480 includes strong protections for the privacy of personal data collected and
used in connection with monitoring and modeling activities.
The need for accurate and comprehensive data collection is essential to addressing
the problems of the Upper Mississippi River Basin. In crafting this legislation, I
have worked with farmers, the navigation industry, sporting groups, environmental
organizations, and government agencies throughout the region. As co-chair of the
Upper Mississippi River Basin Congressional Task Force, I have also worked to
build consensus among regional legislators on how best to approach the natural
resource challenges of the basin.
While focused in the Upper Mississippi River Basin, the benefits of the programs
authorized in this bill would extend far beyond the five-state region, because nutri-
ents and sediments from the Upper Midwest have impacts all the way down the
Mississippi and into the Gulf of Mexico. Moreover, I see this approach as a pilot
for future watershed and basin initiatives in other parts of the nation.
As you know, water quality problems in the Mississippi River Basin cross tradi-
tional state and administrative boundaries. Solving these problems requires a co-
ordinated and cooperative approach between the Federal, state, and local agencies
and groups working throughout the region. H.R. 3480 represents a common-sense
move toward building the scientific foundation necessary to remedying nutrient and
sediment problems in the region.
Thank you for the opportunity to share my remarks on this important legislation.
I appreciate your consideration and I urge the Subcommittees support.

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you. Did you want to insert the letter from
the Governors?
Mr. KIND. I would, without objection.
Mr. WALDEN. Without objection, it will be added in.
Mr. KIND. Thank you.
[The letter from the six Governors submitted for the record by
Mr. Kind follows:]

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 13

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 14

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 15

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you.

Mr. Keys, let us focus on House Bill 3606 for a second, the
Wallowa Lake Dam issue. Is there ever any Federal interest in a
non-Federal facility, from your perspective?
Mr. KEYS. Mr. Chairman, I think all of us are always interested
when we see a facility that is not safe. Who funds it and how you
take care of it is another issue. In the past, we have worked with
some non-Federal facilities, but when we did that, they actually be-
came part of the project.
Mr. WALDEN. Part of the Federal project.
Mr. KEYS. Yes, sir. An example is over on the Ochoco project in
your district there, that was an old private dam that became part
of the Federal project when we added on to it, and then we went
back in and did safety and damage repairs on it. It became part
of the Federal project and became part of the repayment obligation
under Reclamation law.
Mr. WALDEN. As you are aware, there is a need for rehabilitation
of this facility. This is pretty obvious I think to all of us. Who
would you suggest then that we could turn to for help, if we do not
go that approach, the Federalizing approach? Are there other
resources out there we can bring to bear? This is a small commu-
nity in a very economically devastated part of my district.
Mr. KEYS. Mr. Chairman, in other places that we have worked
with a private facility like that that is done on safety, we worked
with the States involved.
In the Northwest there, Oregon, Washington, Idaho have worked
with us on our Safety of Dams Program and us working coopera-
tively with them on their Safety of Dams Programs for a long time.
I know that those three States have mechanisms for funding
those kinds of corrections. I dont know what was done in the
Wallowa Lake Dam process for them to seek funding from the
State of Oregon, though.
Mr. WALDEN. All right. Are you aware of the Bureaus involve-
ment in conservation and fisheries issues in the Upper Basin that
date back like to 1984 and obligations under the ESA?
Mr. KEYS. Mr. Chairman, yes, I am.
Mr. WALDEN. Is there a nexus there we can look onto, Mr. Keys?
Mr. KEYS. Mr. Chairman, dealing with the Endangered Species
Act and those listed salmon there have been a challenge to Rec-
lamation since they were listed in 1990, 1991.
There are a number of actions that are underway to try to do off-
site mitigation, to provide waters for helping move the fish up and
down the river. That part of this proposal is a good proposal. For
them to be able to try to set up an exchange there is something
that we have participated in and encouraged them to do. It is a
good part of the program. It is just that the Safety of Dams part
of it makes it not acceptable.
The way they deal with the power plant in this funding is also
something that causes us pause.
Mr. WALDEN. From what perspective?
Mr. KEYS. Mr. Chairman, from the perspective that they are ask-
ing for Federal money to go in and put a power plant in, us not
have any ownership, us not get any of the benefit from the genera-
tion there, that it become part of the Federal grid.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 16

The precedent of spending Reclamation money, when we need to

spend that money on our own Safety of Dams Program, to spend
that money building a power plant, when we have our own system
to operate, and maintain and try to add to just causes us pause.
Mr. WALDEN. Can you tell me, if you know, what kind of the
backlog is of your Federal Dams Safety Program in terms of cost?
Mr. KEYS. Mr. Chairman, I would not say that we have a backlog
in our Safety of Dams Program. We have a long list of facilities to
take a look at. We have planned schedule to do that. We, this year,
in 2002, are finishing up work at Pine View. We are doing the work
at Horse Tooth and in Wickiup in your district.
Mr. WALDEN. Right.
Mr. KEYS. We should finish up Pine View this year and pick up
Keechelus, in the State of Washington, to start on next year.
Those monies that we have are adequate for meeting that sched-
ule. We have to come back for reauthorization of the act next year
because the authorization and funding levels that we have now run
out in the year 2003.
Mr. WALDEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Keys.
Mr. Kind, do you have any questions of our witnesses?
Mr. KIND. Just a couple for Director Hirsch.
First of all, thank you for your testimony and for the feedback
that you have been able to give our office in working with us.
Just so we are clear, is the stated purpose and goals of the legis-
lation consistent with the type of work that USGS is currently in-
volved in, in better preserving and protecting the Upper
Mississippi River Basin, in your opinion?
Mr. HIRSCH. Yes, absolutely. It is quite consistent.
Mr. KIND. Is it, in your opinion, consistent with the Gulf of Mex-
ico Watershed Nutrient Task Force and the recommendations that
they made, especially as it relates to the scientific and the research
portion of what needs to be done to address that issue?
Mr. HIRSCH. Yes, it certainly is.
Mr. KIND. I share your concern in regards to the funding level
of the variety of USGS water monitoring and water quality pro-
grams in that. I think, at a time, given the work that has been
done with the task force down South and the collaborative network
of cooperation that exists in the Upper Miss area, too, that we need
to be moving more in the direction of increased water monitoring
and even in establishing a modeling network in that.
But it is a little disheartening to see so many current water
gauges being taken out of service at a time when we really should
be protecting that and, in fact, expanding that so we know what
is happening and what the best management practice is, but obvi-
ously that will be an issue for the Congress to decide, in regards
to the appropriate allocation of resources.
Let me just quickly compliment USGS. I have seen your offices
and the personnel that you have working in them, and the profes-
sionalism and the scientific expertise that they bring to a whole
host of issues, whether it is long-term resource monitoring and
even some of the modeling now that they are starting to dab into.
I think this legislation is very consistent and a nice mesh with the
type of quality that exists with USGS personnel you have in place

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 17

and the type of work that is being conducted. Would you say that
is an accurate statement?
Mr. HIRSCH. Yes, and thank you for the compliments. We are in-
deed proud of what we have been doing. I recently visited our office
in La Crosse and was most impressed by the work that they do
there.
Mr. KIND. Right. Well, thank you very much again for your testi-
mony and your feedback. We will be happy to continue working
with you and your entire office as we move forward.
Thank you.
Mr. WALDEN. Thank you, Mr. Kind.
Gentlemen, thank you for being here today. We appreciate your
testimony very much.
I would like to call up our second panel of witnesses; Mr.
Schnoor, Mr. Daigle, Holly Stoerker, and John McLachlan, and Mr.
McMillen as well.
Mr. McMillen, we will start with you, since you are the only
other witness on H.R. 3606clearly, the most important bill before
this Subcommittee this morning.
[Laughter.]
STATEMENT OF MORTON McMILLEN,
MONTGOMERY WATSON HARZA
Mr. MCMILLEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My name is Morton McMillen, and I am here today representing
the Steering Committee for the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation
and Management Project. I am currently a design engineer with
Montgomery Watson Harza, assigned to their Boise, Idaho, office,
where I serve as a senior project engineer and manager for water
resources and aquaculture projects.
Mr. WALDEN. Mr. McMillen, push down the button. There you go.
Mr. MCMILLEN. I wish to thank the U.S. House of Representa-
tives and the Subcommittee on Water and Power for the oppor-
tunity to testify on behalf of Bill H.R. 3606 to authorize the Bu-
reau of Reclamation to participate in the Wallowa Lake Dam Reha-
bilitation and Water Management Plan. It is truly an honor to be
present here in our Nations capital and work with elected leaders
of this Nation.
As a member of the Steering Committee and a native of Wallowa
County, I bring a project proposal before you which is founded in
the soil of rural Wallowa County. This project balances the needs
of competing demands for our precious water resources, while pro-
tecting the economic foundation of the community. This project was
framed by the local residents to meet the needs of agriculture, flood
control, recreation and water supply, while also protecting and en-
hancing our invaluable fish and wildlife resources.
Wallowa Lake Dam is located on the natural outlet of Wallowa
Lake and provides up to 50,000 acre-feet of storage. The dam was
originally constructed in 1918 and raised in 1929 to provide addi-
tional storage for irrigation and hydropower generation. The res-
ervoir has historically provided high-quality water, supporting a
wide range of uses, which include: irrigation; potable water supply
for the city of Joseph; it has a huge recreation opportunity, with
over 800,000 recreational users per year that visit the lake; the

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 18

flood control, with active storage managed to provide flood

protection in the Cities of Joseph, Enterprise, and Wallowa during
spring runoff periods; and it also comprises base flows to the
Wallowa River and the Grande Ronde Rivers, which currently have
listed species for spring chinook and bull trout.
The ADC embarked on the planning and design of long-term im-
provements to Wallowa Lake Dam and quickly realized that the
dam was the central structure to water management within
Wallowa Valley. The balance between agricultural needs and the
salmon recovery was identified as one of the primary program ele-
ments. The Nez Perce Tribe, in cooperation with the Oregon De-
partment of Fish & Wildlife, with oversight by the National Marine
Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, have begun
the planning and implementation of salmon recovery measures
throughout the Wallowa Valley.
An integrated water management plan for the Wallowa River
Corridor is necessary to ensure these measures are successful, as
well as meet demands from a widespread spectrum of additional
users.
ADC invited members of the community, State resource agencies,
and Federal agencies to participate in the development of a water
management plan, which considered the multi-purpose water de-
mands. Through this coordinated effort, a partnership was formed
led by the ADC and the Grande Ronde Model Watershed, with
technical assistance in the upper valley by Montgomery Watson
Harza and in the lower valley by the Bureau of Reclamation.
An integrated plan was formulated addressing water manage-
ment issues within the length of the corridor. The basic elements
of this plan are presented within the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabili-
tation and Water Management Plan Vision Statement, dated Feb-
ruary 2001.
There are a number of benefits in addition to dam safety for this
project. These benefits include flood protection; there is water con-
servation, through improved irrigation methods; potable water sup-
ply; fish passage and protection, including enhancement and re-
introduction of coho and sockeye salmon in the basin; continued
recreation use; provisions for additional hydropower to meet future
demands so we dont have a repeat of what happened last year; fish
protection; agriculture production; increased tourism; and economic
stability.
The Wallowa Valley economy has historically been founded in
natural resource industries, primarily agriculture and timber.
Wallowa Lake Dam has provided irrigation water support to agri-
culture development. As with most rural communities, timber-
based industries are rapidly disappearing. Tourism has become an
increasingly important part of the local economy. Wallowa Lake is
the principal draw to this area. Rehabilitation of the dam and en-
hancement of the fishery resources will provide additional tourism
dollars to the local economy.
The experience and knowledge gained from this project will also
serve watershed planning efforts throughout the Northwest. This
program will outline the framework and institutional requirements
to implement a true watershed approach to balancing competing
demands for our water supplies. The grassroots-driven approach,

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 19

which anticipates and plans for regulatory requirements, rather

than reacting to regulatory enforcement, is critical to maintain eco-
nomic stability and cooperative working environments.
We strongly support the passing of Bill H.R. 3606, authorizing
the Bureau of Reclamation to participate in the rehabilitation of
the Wallowa Lake Dam in Oregon and for other purposes. This
project has its root in the Wallowa Valley. The local residents de-
veloped the framework for the project to address current pressing
dam safety issues, as well as anticipating future regulatory re-
quirements. These stakeholders have proactively formed a Steering
Committee and invited all interested agencies to participate and
become part of the solution.
We have received written letters of support from the National
Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Oregon De-
partment of Fish & Wildlife, and the Nez Perce Tribe.
The Steering Committee initiated the planning and coordination
for this project prior to the Klamath Falls calamity. The committee
implemented a cooperative program, requesting up-front coordina-
tion with the participating agencies. The proposed project elements
represent a balance between what is physically, institutionally and
financially feasible. This grassroots approach is the foundation to
a successful project development, implementation, and operation.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McMillen follows:]
Statement of Morton D. McMillen, Principal Engineer, Montgomery Watson
Harza, Boise, Idaho, Representing Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and
Water Management Plan Steering Committee
Dear Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee on Water and Power:
We wish to thank the members of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Sub-
committee on Water and Power for the opportunity to testify on behalf of bill
H.R. 3606 to authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to participate in the Wallowa
Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management Plan. It is truly an honor to be
present here in our Nations Capital and participate in the democratic process which
is the foundation of our Country.
As a member of the Steering Committee and native of Wallowa County, I bring
a project proposal before you which is founded in the soil of Wallowa County, bal-
ances the needs of competing demands for our precious water resources, and pro-
tects the economic foundation of the community. This project was framed by the
local residents to meet the needs of agriculture, recreation, flood control, recreation
and water supply while also protecting our invaluable fish and wildlife resources.
The Steering Committee requested that I present written and verbal testimony
to this Subcommittee hearing representing the interests of the Steering Committee
partners. My understanding of the engineering and scientific basis for the proposed
project as well as a hands on understanding of the issues facing the local residents
was the basis for this selection. My roots are firmly entrenched in the Wallowa Val-
ley and I bring a personal commitment to see this project through to completion to
the Subcommittee.
My family originally homesteaded in the Grangeville, Idaho area and relocated to
the Wallowa County in 1948. My grandfather raised cattle and farmed until his re-
tirement in 1975. My father and most of my relatives have been employed in the
agriculture or timber industry within Wallowa County. I was raised on a cattle farm
outside of Enterprise and grew up using the irrigation systems provided with water
stored behind Wallowa Lake Dam. My father served as the foreman for an Angus
cattle ranch and my mother was a charge nurse at the Wallowa County nursing
home.
Upon graduation from Enterprise High School, I attended the University of Idaho
at Moscow, Idaho graduating with a degree in Civil Engineering in May 1986. My
first professional employment was with the Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla
District. I started employment with the Corps as a cooperative education student
in 1984 and continued following graduation until 1989. While with the Corps, I was

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 20
actively involved in the planning and design of fish passage and production facilities
within the Snake River Basin, including the Grande Ronde River for which the
Wallowa River is a tributary. Specific project experience included juvenile and adult
passage projects on the Lower Snake River dams, hatchery production facilities on
the Clearwater and Snake River, and acclimation facilities in Idaho and Eastern
Oregon. My work experience also includes design of flood control structures includ-
ing dams, channels, and pipelines.
I returned to graduate school in 1989 at Stanford University where I focused on
expanding my background into water quality and treatment process design. Upon
graduation, I entered the private engineering industry. For the past 9 years I have
been employed at Montgomery Watson Harza where I serve as a senior project engi-
neer and manager for water resources and aquaculture projects. I have been in-
volved in projects throughout the Umatilla, Walla Walla, and Grande Ronde River
Basins.
This written testimony was developed to provide a summary of the background
and elements of the project, the benefits and schedule, and the importance of the
project to the community and watershed planning in future basins. The testimony
is organized as follows:
Project Background summarizing the events leading to the program develop-
ment.
Mission Statement guiding the program development.
Identified Issues addressed within the program.
Water Management Plan and Infrastructure project elements.
Proactive Agency Coordination which has occurred
Proactive Coordination with Other Programs which has occurred.
Achieved Visible Accomplishments already derived.
Measurable Benefits resulting from the program.
Budget and Schedule requirements.
Summary
Project Background
The Wallowa Valley is located in Northeast Oregon approximately 330 miles east
of Portland, Oregon. The valley is encircled by the Wallowa Mountains, Blue Moun-
tains, and Seven Devil Mountains. Located one mile south of Joseph, Oregon,
Wallowa Lake sits at the base of the Wallowa Mountains and is fed by a drainage
basin over 50 square miles in size located within the Eagle Cap Wilderness Area.
Wallowa Lake Dam is located on the natural outlet of Wallowa Lake and provides
up to 50,000 acres-feet of storage. The dam was originally constructed in 1918 and
raised in 1929 to provide additional storage for irrigation and hydropower genera-
tion. The dam is owned and operated by the Associated Ditch Companies, Incor-
porated (ADC).
Fed from wilderness area high in the Wallowa Mountains, the Wallowa Lake res-
ervoir has historically provided high quality water supporting a wide range of uses
including:
Irrigation of over 15,000 acres of prime agricultural land within the Wallowa
Valley.
Potable water supply for the City of Joseph.
Recreation with over 800,000 recreational users enjoying boating, water skiing,
personal water craft, swimming, and fishing.
Flood control with the active storage managed to provide flood protection to the
Cities of Joseph, Enterprise, and Wallowa during spring runoff periods.
Base flows to the Wallowa River and Grande Ronde Rivers preserving and en-
hancing riparian habitat, fish stocks, water fowl, and overall water quality.
Wallowa Lake Dam was listed as a high hazard structure in March of 1996 by
the Oregon Water Resources Department of Dam Safety. The sudden failure and re-
lease of water would probably result in loss of life as well as severe economic and
environmental damage. The ADC moved quickly to implement short-term structural
improvements in 1996 to stabilize the dam. The reservoir has subsequently been
held below full pool elevation to maintain safety.
The ADC embarked on the planning and design of long term improvements to
Wallowa Lake Dam and quickly realized that the dam was the central structure to
water management within the Wallowa Valley. The balance between agricultural
needs and salmon recovery was identified as one of the primary program elements.
The Nez Perce Tribe in cooperation with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wild-
life are actively planning and implementing salmon recovery measures throughout
the Wallowa Valley. An integrated water management plan for the Wallowa River
corridor is necessary to ensure these measures are successful as well as meet de-
mands from a wide spectrum of additional users.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 21
ADC invited members of the community, state resource agencies, and Federal
agencies to participate in the development of a water management plan, which con-
sidered the multi-purpose water demands. Through this coordinated effort, a part-
nership was formed led by the ADC and the Grande Ronde Model Watershed Pro-
gram with technical assistance provided by Montgomery Watson Harza. An inte-
grated plan was formulated addressing water management issues through the
length of the Wallowa River Corridor. The basic elements of this plan are presented
within the Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management Plan Vision
Statement, dated February 2001.
Mission Statement
The steering committee set out to define the goals and objectives at the onset of
the project development. These objectives are clearly summarized in the project Mis-
sion Statement:
To rehabilitate Wallowa Lake Dam and implement a water management
program for the Wallowa Valley serving the needs of agriculture, salmon
recovery, fish and wildlife enhancement, recreation, flood control, municipal
water supply, and hydropower generation.
This mission statement serves as the foundation of the program upon which
progress and benefits will be measured. Throughout the project development and
implementation, the steering committee will return to the mission statement to en-
sure the project is managed within the original mission framework.
Identified Issues
Water management issues within the Wallowa River corridor, both environmental
and infrastructure needs were identified by the study team through pre-planning
work tasks and coordination meetings. The primary issues identified were:
Wallowa Lake Dam does not meet current dam safety requirements for stability
against sliding and overturning, earthquake resistance, spillway capacity, and
outlet tunnel condition. The dam is listed as a high hazard structure by the
Oregon State Department of Dam Safety and major improvements are necessary
to protect human life and property.
Three irrigation withdrawals downstream from the dam are unscreened poten-
tially impacting ESA listed bull trout and salmon.
Accurate water measurement and control are not possible with the existing
manual diversion gates. Without these systems in place, active conservation ef-
forts would be difficult to implement and monitor.
Adult fish passage at Wallowa Lake Dam will be required to support the re-
introduction of coho and sockeye salmon to Wallowa Lake as part of the
Wallowa County Salmon Recovery Plan.
Irrigation withdrawals in the Lostine River create low flow conditions impass-
able to migrating ESA listed Spring Chinook salmon and Bull Trout.
Hydropower production with the dam water releases is not being realized.
Current water management in the Wallowa River corridor is fragmented with
competing needs for irrigation and salmon recovery efforts.
Water Management Plan and Infrastructure
The participating partners have developed a phased project approach focusing on
early action on the high priority project elements. The phased approach allows the
planning and design of the complete project, then implementation of the infrastruc-
ture in a sequenced manner. The project phases are:
Phase IWallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management Plan De-
velopment
Phase IIFish Passage Improvements and Water Conservation Measures
Phase IIIImplementation of Water Exchange Infrastructure
Phase IVHydropower Implementation
Rehabilitation of Wallowa Lake Dam is the critical element to the success of the
program. The dam serves as the water management tool for storing and releasing
water to support the multi-purpose uses. The priority of Phase I is to plan, design,
and construct the recommended improvements to Wallowa Lake Dam. With the dam
rehabilitation complete, operation will return to the full pool storage elevation.
Water from the storage reservoir will then be allocated to the Lostine River and
Bear Creek Valley irrigators in exchange for Lostine River water to remain within
the river. A water management plan will be developed outlining the water manage-
ment framework for the Wallowa River corridor including the water exchange from
the storage reservoir.
The Phase I work will also complete the planning and environmental analysis re-
quired to support implementation of the integrated water management plan. The
administrative, policy, and management framework required to develop a successful

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 22
water management plan will be developed. The mechanism and infrastructure nec-
essary to address the critical water management issues will be identified and serve
as the basis for the subsequent work phases.
Phase II will focus on the planning and implementation of fish screens, automated
head gates, and flow measurement devices at the unscreened diversions. Provisions
for adult fish passage will be planned as part of the Phase I work and implemented
in Phase II to support re-introduction of coho and sockeye salmon to Wallowa Lake.
The Nez Perce Tribe are currently preparing a masterplan outlining the require-
ments for coho re-introduction within the Wallowa Valley.
With Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation complete, the stored water will be avail-
able to supplement irrigation needs within the Lostine River and Bear Creek Val-
leys. Phase III will plan, design, and implement the infrastructure and institutional
framework to execute a water exchange. The infrastructure requirements include
pumps and pipelines to transfer water from the Wallowa River to the Lostine and
Bear Creek Valley irrigation system. Lostine River water will remain in the river
during the critical spring chinook salmon migration period of late July through Sep-
tember. Storage in Wallowa Lake will be reserved to supplement irrigation demands
in the Lostine Valley during this period. The Bonneville Power Administration has
completed the predesign for new production facilities on the Lostine River designed
to supplement and enhance runs of ESA listed spring chinook salmon. The produc-
tion facilities will be completed in December 2005 which concurs with the scheduled
completion of Phase III.
Phase IV will evaluate and implement a hydropower facility to recover energy
from water releases from Wallowa Lake Dam. A generation plant was operated at
the dam for many years, but was decommissioned following a fire in the 1950s.
With the current increase in power rates throughout the country, re-establishing a
hydropower facility at the facility is a prudent step. Plans are in place to donate
revenue in excess of cost to support the Wallowa County Hospital. The hospital has
been operating unprofitably for many years and is threatened with closing. The hy-
dropower facility would provide the hospital with a stable revenue stream and ben-
efit the community. The proposed hydroelectric generation facility provides a renew-
able energy source operating with environmental measures in place to protect en-
dangered species and maintain water quality.
Proactive Agency Coordination
The partners have been working over the past two years to develop a framework
for planning and implementation of the program. This framework is designed with
a foundation led by local Wallowa County groups and extending to the support of
State and Federal agencies. This grass roots approach has led to a number of accom-
plishments.
Development of a steering committee to assist in development and guidance of
the program. This steering committee is led by strong local groups, which are
the Grande Ronde Model Watershed and the ADC.
Coordination with the Nez Perce Tribe and the Oregon Department of Fish in
Wildlife to integrate ongoing salmon recovery measures with water manage-
ment. The tribe and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife are co-managers
of the fishery resources within the Wallowa Valley and have established work-
ing relationships to manage and enhance fishery resources.
Submittal of grants proposals to obtain technical data and install flow meas-
uring devices. These grants were obtained and monitoring devices installed to
assist in the planning, design, and implementation of the project elements.
Implementation of a public involvement program to involve members of the com-
munity and participating agencies.
Collection of engineering and scientific data on Wallowa Lake Dam, Wallowa
River, and Lostine River.
Conducted a dam safety inspection, evaluation, and remediation evaluation.
Preliminary evaluation of the feasibility of hydropower generation at Wallowa
Lake Dam.
Developed groundwork with the affected irrigators to develop administrative
framework for executing the water exchange.
The partners have been pro-active in developing relationships with the regulatory
agencies and bringing these agencies on board as part of the steering committee.
The program is designed to address looming ESA issues, develop solutions, and im-
plement these solutions before regulatory action is required.
Proactive Coordination with Other Programs
Many local, State, and Federal agencies are involved in restoration programs
within the Wallowa Valley. The Wallowa Valley has historically supported a wide

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 23
range of fisheries resource including sockeye salmon, coho salmon, spring chinook
salmon, steelhead, as well as bull trout. Through the Steering Committee and the
leadership of the partnership, close coordination will occur with these programs. Co-
ordination is currently ongoing with but not limited to:
Wallowa County Salmon Restoration planning activities.
Northwest Oregon Hatchery Project where the Nez Perce Tribe and Oregon De-
partment of Fish and Wildlife are planning a spring Chinook hatchery on the
Lostine River.
Coho Salmon restoration master plan led by the Nez Perce Tribe to re-introduce
coho salmon to Wallowa Lake and the Wallowa River.
Steelhead enhancement master plan designed to supplement current steelhead
runs on the Wallowa River and throughout the Grande Ronde Basin.
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife fish screening program designing and
constructing fish screens on small irrigation diversions.
Watershed planning and implementation projects led by the Grande Ronde
Model Watershed.
Oregon Dam Safety requirements.
Coordination with these and other ongoing program will ensure that measures de-
veloped and implemented as part of the Wallowa Valley Project will be optimized
and fully support other program objectives.
Achieved Visible Accomplishments
The partners have been working over the past year to develop a framework for
planning and implementation of the program. This framework is designed with a
foundation led by local Wallowa County groups and extending to the support of
State and Federal agencies. This grass roots approach has led to a number of accom-
plishments.
Development of a steering committee to assist in development and guidance of
the program.
Coordination with the Nez Perce Tribe and the Oregon Department of Fish in
Wildlife to integrate ongoing salmon recovery measures with water manage-
ment.
Submittal of grants proposals to obtain technical data and install flow meas-
uring devices.
Implementation of a public involvement program to involve members of the com-
munity and participating agencies.
Collection of engineering and scientific data on Wallowa Lake Dam, Wallowa
River, and Lostine River.
Conducted a dam safety inspection, evaluation, and remediation evaluation.
Preliminary evaluation of the feasibility of hydropower generation at Wallowa
Lake Dam.
Developed groundwork with the affected irrigators to develop administrative
framework for executing the water exchange.
These accomplishments are visible, productive, and meet the objectives of the mis-
sion statement. The demonstrated ability to develop and implement specific project
elements has been demonstrated and will be maintained throughout the course of
the program.
Measurable Benefits
The proposed project benefits the Wallowa Valley community in many ways. The
integrated approach to the dam rehabilitation and water management is a true eco-
system approach to resource management. Both the citizens of the Wallowa Valley
and the environment can co-exist. Benefits to be realized by the project include:

Flood protection Fish protection

Water conservation Agricultural production
Potable water supply ESA listed salmon restoration
Fish passage and protection Improved fish and wildlife habitat
Continued recreational use Increased tourism
Hydropower energy production Economic stability
The Wallowa Valley economy has historically been founded in natural resource in-
dustries, primarily agriculture and timber. Wallowa Lake Dam has provided the ir-
rigation water to support the agriculture development. As with most rural commu-
nities, timber based industries are rapidly disappearing. Tourism has become an in-
creasingly important component of the local economy. Wallowa Lake is the principal
draw to the area. Rehabilitation of the dam and enhancement of the fishery restores
will provide additional tourism dollars to the local economy.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 24
The experience and knowledge gained from this project will also serve watershed
planning efforts throughout the Northwest. This program will outline the frame-
work and institutional requirements to implement a true watershed approach to
balancing competing demands for out water supplies. The grass roots driven ap-
proach which anticipates and plans for regulatory requirements, rather than react-
ing to regulatory enforcement is critical to maintain economic stability and coopera-
tive working environments.
Summary
We strongly support the passing of bill HR 3606 authorizing the Bureau of Rec-
lamation to participate in the rehabilitation of the Wallowa Lake Dam in Oregon
and for other purposes. This project has its roots in the Wallowa Valley. The local
residents developed the framework for the project to address current pressing dam
safety issues as well as anticipating future regulatory requirements. These stake-
holders have proactively formed a steering committee and invited all interested
agencies to participate and become part of the solution. The stakeholders have a vi-
sion beyond the rehabilitation of Wallowa Lake Dam and outlined a program which:
Addresses pressing dam safety issues with Wallowa Lake Dam.
Allocates storage in the Wallowa Lake reservoir to use for enhancing fish pas-
sage and habitat conditions in the Lostine River and Bear Creek.
Proactively identifies fish passage improvements to protect existing ESA listed
species as well as support future re-introduction of coho and sockeye salmon.
Allows for incorporation of a renewable hydroelectric power energy source.
Maintains the agricultural economic base for the community.
Enhances the tourism and recreation economic expansion within the valley.
The Steering Committee initiated the planning and coordination for this project
prior to the Klamath Falls calamity. The committee implemented a cooperative pro-
gram requesting up front coordination with the participating agencies. The proposed
project elements represent a balance between what is physically, institutionally, and
financially feasible. This grass roots approach is the foundation to a successful
project development, implementation, and operation.

Mr. WALDEN. We have been called for legislation. We will go for

legislation and then come back for questions.
So Dr. Schnoor, you are next.
STATEMENT OF JERALD L. SCHNOOR, Ph.D., P.E., DEE,
PROFESSOR, CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, CO-
DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR GLOBAL AND REGIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH, THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA
Mr. SCHNOOR. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Walden,
members of the Subcommittee, Congressman Kind. Thank you for
the invitation to discuss the water quality of the Mississippi River
and H.R. 3480, the Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act.
I am Jerry Schnoor, professor of environmental engineering at
the University of Iowa and a member of the National Research
Councils Water Science and Technology Board. I have prepared re-
marks on the need to monitor, model and reduce nutrient and sedi-
ment loads in the Upper Mississippi River Basin, and I ask that
the full written statement that I have provided be made a part of
the record.
Together with Congressman Kind, I co-chaired a workshop on
this subject in January 2001, sponsored by the Board of Science
and Technology Board of the NRC. I was born and reared in Dav-
enport, Iowa, performed research on water quality issues on the
Mississippi River and other places for over 30 years, and I have ob-
served the river all my life.
Permit me to tell you a fish story. When I was 10 years old, my
uncle ran a smokehouse and a small grocery store near Muscatine,
Iowa, on the banks of the Mississippi. He taught me to fish for

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 25

large white sturgeon, a strange prehistoric-looking fish, but a true

delicacy when smoked and savored. Unfortunately, the river has
changed considerably over the past decades. It is no longer possible
to catch sturgeon. They have been largely extirpated from the
river, the victims of soil erosion, over-fertilization and wastewater
discharges.
This tension between humans and the environment is neither in-
evitable nor completely irreversible. We must find ways to protect
the environment, while developing a strong economy. A healthy
economy and a clean environment can go hand-in-hand, I believe,
but to do this, we must understand fully the environment, tech-
nologies for improving it, and human social systems.
The Upper Mississippi River Protection Act seeks to develop a co-
ordinated public-private approach to reducing nutrient and sedi-
ment losses in the Upper Mississippi. It is sorely needed. The first
steps are to establish a water quality monitoring network and
mathematical models of the basic processes for pollutant fate and
transport in the river basin. By cross-comparisons of sub-basins, it
will allow scientists and engineers to decipher what management
approaches are cost-effective in reducing sediment and nutrient
loads to the river. This is a critical need in the Nations effort to
improve water quality, impacted to a large extent by nonpoint
source runoff from the land.
Since pre-settlement days, about 1850, land cover and land use
have changed dramatically. In Iowa, for example, my home State,
90 percent of the land is now in agriculture. This agriculture is the
lifeblood of the economy, but we need to find ways to harmonize it
better with the environment and to sustain quality ecosystems.
Since 1850, we have cleared about two-thirds of the forest land,
drained 95 percent of the wetlands, and replaced 99 percent of the
native prairies. Such drastic change in land cover is bound to influ-
ence water quality. Streams have become clogged by soil erosion,
critical habitat for fish spawning has been covered, and species
have been lost. Changes in land cover, together with the introduc-
tion of locks, and dams and channelization, have destroyed prime
habitat for native aquatic organisms.
What has gone wrong? Well, I would submit that nothing has
really gone wrong. It is simply that we are in the middle of an on-
going effort in adaptive management. Congress recognized the need
in 1972, with the original Clean Water Act, to address nonpoint
source pollution, but monitoring data for proper assessment and
modeling purposes did not exist. Ever since then, we have been
moving toward assessment of the problem and a new program,
Total Maximum Daily Loads. This program requires the States to
perform a new waste load allocation and a load allocation for
nonpoint source pollution for the first time with a margin of safety
to recognize uncertainties.
Basinwide implementation plans will be required and new per-
mits will be eventually issued, a process that could take 10 to 15
years in the future. I believe that monitoring the Nations waters
is critically underfunded in this regard, and it slows the process.
The States are most perplexed by how to implement a program
without enough data to fulfill modeling needs and to perform de-
fensible TMDLs. The Upper Mississippi River Protection Act,

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 26

H.R. 3480, will help to gather this data and construct computer
models for one of the most ecologically and economically important
waters in the Nation.
I strongly support this bill, and thank you for the chance to an-
swer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Schnoor follows:]
Statement of Jerald L. Schnoor, Ph.D., P.E., DEE, Professor, Civil and
Environmental Engineering, CoDirector, Center for Global and Regional
Environmental Research, The University of Iowa, and Member, Water
Science and Technology Board, National Research Council
Good morning, Chairman Calvert and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you
for the invitation to discuss water quality of the Mississippi River and H.R. 3480,
the Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act. I am Jerry Schnoor, a professor
of environmental engineering at the University of Iowa and a member of the Na-
tional Research Councils (NRC) Water Science and Technology Board. The National
Research Council is the operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences, Na-
tional Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine, chartered by Congress in
1863 to advise the government on matters of science and technology. I have pre-
pared remarks on the need to monitor, model, and reduce nutrient and sediment
loads in the Upper Mississippi River Basin. Together with Congressman Kind, I co-
chaired a Workshop on this subject in January 2001, sponsored by the Water
Science and Technology Board of the NRC. I have authored a textbook related to
this subject, Environmental Modeling: Fate and Transport of Pollutants in Water,
Air, and Soil (John Wiley and Sons, New York, 682 pp., 1996), and performed re-
search on water quality issues for almost 30 years. I am born and reared in Dav-
enport, Iowa, on the Mississippi River, and I have observed the river all my life.
Permit me to tell a fish story. When I was ten years old, my uncle ran a smoke-
house and small grocery store near Muscatine, Iowa, on the banks of the Mississippi
River. He taught me to fish for large white sturgeon, a strange prehistoric-looking
fish, but a true delicacy when smoked and savored. Unfortunately, the river has
changed considerably over the past decades. Its no longer possible to catch stur-
geonthey have been largely extirpated from the river, the victims of soil erosion,
over-fertilization, and wastewater discharges. This tension between humans and
their environment is neither inevitable nor completely irreversible. We must find
ways to protect the environment while developing a strong economy. A healthy econ-
omy and a clean environment can go hand-in-hand. To do this, we must understand
fully the environment, technologies for improvement, and human social systems.
The Upper Mississippi Protection Act seeks to develop a coordinated public-pri-
vate approach to reducing nutrient and sediment losses in the Upper Mississippi
River Basin. It is sorely needed. The first steps are to establish a water quality
monitoring network and mathematical models of the basic processes for pollutant
fate and transport in the river basin. By cross-comparisons of sub-basins, it will
allow scientists and engineers to decipher what management approaches are cost-
effective in reducing sediment and nutrient loads to the river. This is a critical need
in the nations effort to improve water quality, impacted to a large extent by
nonpoint source runoff from the land.
Since pre-settlement days (circa 1850), land cover and land use have changed dra-
matically. In Iowa, for example, 90% of the land is now in agriculture. This agri-
culture is the li lood of the economy, but we need to find ways to harmonize it better
with the environment and to sustain quality ecosystems. Since 1850, we have
cleared about two-thirds of the forestland, drained 95% of the wetlands, and re-
placed 99% of the native prairies. Such drastic change in land cover is bound to in-
fluence water quality. Streams have become clogged by soil erosion, critical habitat
for fish spawning has been covered, and species have been lost. Changes in land
cover, together with the introduction of locks and dams and channelization, have de-
stroyed prime habitat for native aquatic organisms.
In 1972, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act), P.L. 92500,
sought a goal of swimmable and fishable waters. After spending billions of dollars
each year, the nation has benefited significantly from secondary treatment of point
source discharges (municipal and industrial wastewater treatment). The Act estab-
lished the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) in which ap-
proximately 70,000 permits have been issued to enforce water quality standards.
Water quality of the nations inland waters improved greatly during the next 20
years. Unfortunately, those improvements have, for the most part, run their course,
and we are still short of our goal. In the U.S., we have 21,000 waters that are not

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 27
expected to meet their intended uses, even with permitted discharges. Many of these
stream and lake segments are in the Upper Mississippi River Basin, primarily im-
pacted by sediments, nutrients and fecal coliform bacteria. What went wrong?
Nothing really went wrong. It is simply an ongoing effort in adaptive manage-
ment. Congress recognized the need in 1972 to address nonpoint source pollution,
but monitoring data for proper assessment and modeling purposes did not exist.
Ever since then, we have been moving towards assessment of the problem and a
new program, Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL). This program requires the
states to perform a new waste load allocation and a load allocation for nonpoint
source pollution with a margin- of-safety to recognize uncertainties. Basin-wide im-
plementation plans will be required and new permits will eventually be issued, a
process that may take 1015 years. I believe monitoring of the nations waters is
critically under-funded and slows this processthe states are perplexed by how to
implement a program without enough data to fulfill modeling needs and perform de-
fensible TMDLs. The Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act will help to
gather this data and construct computer models for one of the most ecologically and
economically important waters in the nation.
Trends in water quality of the Upper Mississippi River over the past 30 years are
difficult to delineate with so little data, but some general observations can be stated.
Nitrate concentrations are getting worse in some highly agricultural areas, probably
due to increased applications of nitrogen fertilizers. Fertilizers are applied at appli-
cation rates larger than the crops can assimilate, and the result is runoff of nitrogen
valued at more than $300 million per year. The trend towards greater density of
animals in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) is also accelerating. It
is difficult for operators to apply manure onto the land in an acceptable manner
when the density of animals and sheer volume of the manure becomes so great. On
the other hand, conservation tillage practices on farms have really taken hold, and
there is some evidence that suspended solids (silt) and total phosphorus concentra-
tions may be decreasing (improving).
That the Upper Mississippi River still fails to meet the goals of the Clean Water
Act and its intended uses is undeniable. Spawning areas are covered with silt by
soil erosion, nitrate concentrations exceed drinking water standards in many loca-
tions, bathing beaches are closed due to fecal coliform bacteria in the water, and
algae choke many waterways due to eutrophication (the excessive rate of addition
of nutrients). Furthermore, the problems are multiplied by the transport of sedi-
ments and nutrients downstream, creating a conundrum for the Gulf of Mexico.
Gulf Hypoxia refers to a zone of low dissolved oxygen in the Gulf of Mexico that
has grown to 1217,000 square kilometers since 1985, roughly the size of Massachu-
setts. It is probably caused by the build-up of nutrients in sediments from algal
blooms over the past 50 years or so. Remember, we said that the nations inland
waters had, for the most part, improved during the period 19721990s because of
the Clean Water Act and its amendments. But our nations coastal waters have not
improved similarly. We do not understand fully why, but it seems there is a time
lag associated with sediment anoxia that has grown steadily worse due to develop-
ment of coastal zones and the cumulative build-up of nutrients and silt from
riverine transport. Thus, the problems in the Gulf of Mexico are, to a large extent,
the problems of the Upper Mississippi River Basin transported downstream. It is
thought that about 31% of the nutrient loadings to the Gulf come from the Upper
Mississippi River Basin alone, mainly from agricultural runoff. Although it is dif-
ficult to document damages in the Gulf at the present time, continued growth of the
hypoxic zone will eventually result in the loss of important fisheries.
Economic impacts already can be documented in the Upper Mississippi River
Basin. Dredging of sediments in the navigation channel costs over $100 million each
year. Farmers lose more than $300 million annually in nitrogen fertilizer runoff,
and the loss of aquatic habitat and beach closings threatens the rivers $1.2 billion
recreation and $6.6 billion tourism industries. The fishing industry, both commercial
and recreational, has changed substantially in the past 50 years, but it is difficult
to allocate damages among the many causes of soil erosion, agricultural runoff, mu-
nicipal and industrial wastewater discharges, over-fishing, and invasive species.
Invasive species are one of the thorniest problems nation-wide, a serious by-product
of global commerce. Zebra mussels, Dreissena polymorpha, were introduced by bal-
last water to the Great Lakes in 1986. They entered the Upper Mississippi River
Basin a few years later, clogging water intake structures and out-competing native
mussels for habitat. So far, costs of control and eradication have exceeded $138 mil-
lion. They are not the only problems: several carp species including grass, bighead,
silver and black carp have all been introduced since the 1970s by aquaculture.
Perhaps the largest data gap and the greatest motivation for H.R. 3480 are to
evaluate Best Management Practices (BMPs). BMPs refer to those management

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 28
practices that could ameliorate agricultural runoff and reduce its impact on lakes
and rivers. They include conservation tillage, grass stripping, riparian zone buffer
strips, contour plowing and terracing, and wetlands restoration. There is a dis-
connectwhile most scientists believe that BMPs are what is needed to solve the
problem of nonpoint pollution, they have precious little data to prove it. Some BMP
practices are already in place, and a coordinated public-private program of moni-
toring and modeling could help to analyze their effectiveness. Local, state, and
Federal water quality monitoring and modeling efforts need to be joined to obtain
a comprehensive picture. Eventually we will need to control nonpoint sources of pol-
lution in the most cost-effective manner. We are embarking on a massive under-
taking, but Americans deserve nothing less than clean water for drinking, fishing,
contact recreation, and beautiful, functioning ecosystems.
One mantra in business is, If we can measure it, we can manage it. If we can
manage it, we should be able to improve it. That is the impetus for the Upper
Mississippi River Basin Protection Act. It should be accomplished by the highest
qualified professionals, subjected to rigorous peer review, and results should be pub-
lished in the freely available literature. I believe that H.R. 3480 provides such a
study. It addresses a very serious national problem, protection of water quality and
a natural resource treasure.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to discuss these issues. I would be happy
to try to answer any questions you may have.

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you, Doctor.

We are getting called for a vote, but we will go ahead and take
two more panelists. We can get this done in about 5 minutes, and
that should give Mr. Kind and I time to sprint over and vote, and
then come back.
So let us go now to Doug Daigle, I believe.
Mr. Daigle, welcome.

STATEMENT OF DOUG DAIGLE, HYPOXIA PROGRAM

DIRECTOR, MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN ALLIANCE
Mr. DAIGLE. Thank you. My name is Doug Daigle. Mr. Chairman
and members of the Subcommittee, I welcome the opportunity to
speak with you about Bill H.R. 3480, the Upper Mississippi River
Protection Act, authorized by Representative Kind.
This bill is of particular interest to the organization that I rep-
resent because it will help address one of the key issues that we
are dealing with. It is an issue of national concern as well, which
is nutrient pollution of the river and the growth of hypoxia in the
northern Gulf of Mexico.
The Mississippi River Basin Alliance is a nonprofit organization,
and it has got over 150 member groups along the entire length of
the river, and we have a real diverse membership, shrimpers on
the Gulf, farmers in the Midwest. The mission is really to protect
and restore the health of the river system and the communities
who depend on it, and the organization was founded on the premise
that the Mississippi River Basin, though large, is really one sys-
tem, and its problems need to be addressed in a basin-like context.
That is why we adopted the issue of Gulf hypoxia as one of our
key issues of concern. The concerns about the impacts of hypoxia
on the most productive fisheries in the lower 48 States led to the
problem being addressed at the highest levels of the U.S. Govern-
ment, and the White House Office of Science and Technology initi-
ated an integrated assessment of hypoxia. There was the Harmful
Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998, man-
dating a task force made up of Federal agencies with jurisdiction

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 29

and key States along the river to deal with the problem, and they
came up with an action plan.
The action plan called for reducing the frequency, the duration,
the size and degree of oxygen depletion in the Gulf. It provided a
basinwide context for doing that and relies on incentive-based vol-
untary efforts for nonpoint sources of nitrogen loading, and the ex-
isting regulatory controls for point sources, but it does more than
that because it makes clear that the efforts to reduce Gulf hypoxia
will also deliver improvements to water quality throughout the
basin and that there is really a reciprocal relationship there, and
I will quote briefly from the action plan.
While the primary focus of this strategy is on reducing nitrogen
loads to the northern Gulf, many of the actions proposed through
this plan will also achieve basinwide improvements in surface
water quality. Likewise, actions taken to address local water qual-
ity problems in the basin will frequently also contribute to reduc-
tions in nitrogen loadings to the Gulf.
So this brings us to the importance of H.R. 3480. The action plan
identifies priorities of research and monitoring necessary to sup-
port its goals, and it has a framework of adaptive management,
based on implementation, monitoring and research, so they could
address known problems, clarify scientific uncertainties and evalu-
ate the effectiveness of the efforts to reduce hypoxia.
The expanded monitoring network for sediment and nutrient loss
in the Upper Mississippi River Basin proposed by H.R. 3480 has
the potential to significantly aid and complement implementation
of the Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan with the upper river, and it also
is going to help us by integrating data from all sources, and the
consultation and collaboration with other public and private moni-
toring efforts that it has called for are going to be a tremendous
aid as well.
We want to discuss this bill today. We should recognize, as well,
as we discuss it, we would be remiss if we didnt recognize some
other events that could affect its success and the success of the ac-
tion plan and that measure. The proposed budget reductions for
Fiscal Year 2003 for the U.S. Geological Survey would negatively
impact water data collection, water quality research and assess-
ments, and university-based education and research-related water
systems.
As our discussions about 3480 illustrate today, these proposed re-
ductions are really shortsighted. The work of the USGS is too im-
portant and our need for it is too great to really trade that all for
some short-term fiscal gain from reducing the budgets of those pro-
grams.
A couple of weeks ago, the Gulf Hypoxia Task Force met in St.
Louis, a very constructive meeting. They are willing to work, but
they need funding, and this type of bill is just the type of measure
that could help bring success to their efforts and to similar efforts
throughout the basin.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Daigle follows:]

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 30
Statement of Doug Daigle, Hypoxia Program Director, Mississippi River
Basin Alliance, on H.R. 3480
Dear Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee,
I welcome the opportunity to speak to you regarding the bill H.R. 3480, the
Upper Mississippi River Protection Act, authored by Representative Ron Kind of
Wisconsin. This bill is of particular interest to the organization I represent, the
Mississippi River Basin Alliance (MRBA), because it will help to address one of our
key issues of concern, as well as a major problem facing the basin and the country,
which is nutrient pollution in the river system and growth of hypoxia in the north-
ern Gulf of Mexico.
MRBA is a non-profit organization with over 130 member groups along the length
of the river. Our main office is in Minneapolis, and regional offices are located in
St. Louis and New Orleans. The mission of MRBA is to protect and restore the
health of the river system and the communities who depend on it. The founding of
the organization was premised on the realization that the Mississippi River, though
large, was one system and that its problems needed to be addressed in a basin-wide
context.
MRBA adopted the hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico as one of its key issues
for just this reason. A substantial body of scientific research has described the proc-
ess by which this zone of low oxygen manifests itself in Louisianas coastal waters. 1
The occurrence of the hypoxic zone is a result of interactions of nutrients such as
nitrogen carried by the Mississippi River, channelization of the river and loss of
riverine wetlands in the basin, and the stratification of fresh and salt water layers
in the Gulf. Over half of the nitrate load in the Mississippi enters above its con-
fluence with the Ohio.
The highest nitrogen loads enter the river from basins in the upper Midwest. The
majority of the nitrogen is believed to come from non-point sources, such as agricul-
tural runoff, although municipal and industrial wastewater and (to a lesser extent)
atmospheric deposition of nitrates from fossil fuel combustion also make a contribu-
tion.
A simplified description of the process by which hypoxia forms off Louisianas
coast would run as follows: extensive nutrient loading from the Mississippi and
Atchafalaya Rivers fuels the growth of large algal blooms offshore. As the algae dies
and sinks through the water column, its decomposition leads to the depletion of oxy-
gen, primarily in the lower, saltier layer of water. As oxygen levels drop below 2
milligrams per liter, marine life is unable to survive. Mobile organisms such as fish
and shrimp migrate out of the hypoxic area if they can, while benthic (bottom-
dwelling) organisms die off. Since systematic scientific mapping of the Gulf hypoxic
zone began in 1985, the size that it can attain has more than doubled, from roughly
4000 square miles in 1991 to 8000 square miles in the summer of 2001. 2
Concerns about the growth of this hypoxic zone, one of the largest in the world,
center around its effects on the Gulf ecosystem, which sustains the most productive
fishery in the lower 48 states. The rich fisheries off Louisianas coast are in an al-
ready precarious position because of the dramatic ongoing loss of the states coastal
wetlands. As coastal marshes erode and break up, they dispense large amounts of
detritus into the water, which fuel higher populations and harvests of fish and
shrimp, but on a one-time basis. At some point, the loss of marsh habitat, so vital
for the life-cycles of estuarine seafood, will lead to a sharp decline in those popu-
lations and the harvest levels. 3
These concerns led to the hypoxia issue being addressed at the highest levels of
the U.S. government. Under the Clinton administration, the White House Office of
Science and Technology Policy initiated the Integrated Assessment of Hypoxia in the
Northern Gulf of Mexico (completed in 2000), and with the additional mandate pro-
vided by the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998 4,
the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force (hereafter re-
ferred to as the Task Force) convened representatives of jurisdictional Federal

1 See Integrated Assessment of Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico, May 2000. National
Science and Technology Council Committee on Environment and Natural Resources, Wash-
ington, DC; also see Rabalais, Turner, and Scavia, Beyond Science into Policy: Gulf of Mexico
Hypoxia and the Mississippi River, Bioscience Vol. 52, no. 2, February 2002.
2 Dr. Nancy Rabelais, Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium, Press release, July 26, 2001.
3 For information on Louisianas coastal crisis and restoration program, see Coast 2050: To-
wards a Sustainable Coastal Louisiana, Coastal Wetlands Conservation Task Force
(www.lacoast.gov)
4 Title VI of Public Law 105383, section 604 (b), November 13, 1998.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 31
agencies and the governments of states along the river to create an action plan to
reduce the growth of hypoxia in the Gulf.
The Task Force worked for two years in an often contentious atmosphere, since
farm states in the Midwest were understandably concerned about the potential eco-
nomic impacts on their agricultural sectors of remedies to reduce Gulf hypoxia. As
someone who participated in the process as an observer and public commenter, I
can say that it was a significant learning experience for all involved. At the end of
that process, the Task Force fulfilled its charge and reached consensus on a plan.
The Action Plan for Reducing, Mitigating, and Controlling Hypoxia in the North-
ern Gulf of Mexico (hereafter referred to as the Action Plan) lays out a national
strategy to reduce the frequency, duration, size, and degree of oxygen depletion
of the hypoxic zone. 5 The Action Plan provides a basin-wide context for achieving
this goal, relying on incentive-based, voluntary efforts for non-point sources of nitro-
gen loading, and existing regulatory controls for point sources.
Yet it does more than that. The Action Plan also makes clear that efforts to re-
duce Gulf hypoxia will deliver improvements to water quality throughout the basin:
water quality throughout the Mississippi [river basin] has been degraded
by excess nutrients. Most states in the basin have significant river miles
impaired by high nutrient concentrations, primarily phosphorus [and] ex-
cess nitrate, which can be a human health hazard. 6
While the primary focus of this strategy is on reducing nitrogen loads to
the northern Gulf, many of the actions proposed through this plan will also
achieve basinwide improvements in surface-water quality Likewise, actions
taken to address local water quality problems in the basin will frequently
also contribute to reductions in nitrogen loadings to the Gulf. 7
This brings us to the importance of H.R. 3480, the Upper Mississippi River Pro-
tection Act introduced by Representative Kind. The Action Plan identifies as prior-
ities the research and monitoring necessary to support its goals. Its approach of
adaptive management is based on implementation, monitoring, and research, to ad-
dress known problems, clarify scientific uncertainties, and evaluate the effectiveness
of efforts to reduce hypoxia. 8
The expanded monitoring network for sediment and nutrient loss in the Upper
Mississippi River Basin proposed by H.R. 3480 has the potential to significantly aid
and complement implementation of the Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan in that region. In
particular, H.R. 3480 could aid the Task Force in carrying out one of the actions
called for in the Plan for this year:
By Spring 2002, States, Tribes, and Federal agencies within the
Mississippi and Atchafalaya River Basins will expand the existing moni-
toring efforts within the Basin to provide both a coarse resolution assess-
ment of the nutrient contribution of various sub-basins and a high resolu-
tion modeling technique in these smaller watersheds to identify additional
management actions to help mitigate nitrogen losses to the Gulf and nutri-
ent loadings to local waters. 9
Expanded monitoring programs throughout the basin are critical as well to the
ongoing effort to reduce Gulf hypoxia (and to improve state and local water quality):
Effective implementation of [the Action Plan] will require a monitoring
strategy that measures progress towards achieving both long-term and
short-term goals. Feedback from such a monitoring strategy will facilitate
an adaptive management framework that enables continual improvement of
the Action Plan with increasing knowledge of the factors and processes con-
trolling nutrient losses, their effects...and the effectiveness of management
actions. 10
These considerations make clear the importance of the integration of data from
all sources, and the consultation and collaboration with other public and private
monitoring efforts called for in Sections 103 and 104 of H.R. 3480. 11 Just as critical
is the integration of data into modeling and research, as called for in Title II, Sec-
tions 201, 202, and 203 of H.R. 3480. Again, there is significant potential for aiding
and complementing implementation of the Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan, while

5 The Action Plan can be viewed at www.epa.gov/msbasin.

6 Action Plan, p. 7.
7 Action Plan, p.8.
8 Ibid., p.4
9 Ibib., p.13.
10 Ibid., p.23.
11 Section 103 (a), (b), (c), (d), and Section 104, respectively, H.R. 3480.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 32
accurately gauging the effectiveness of water quality improvements in the Upper
Mississippi River Basin:
[The Action Plan] strategy must quantify environmental trends and in-
clude periodic data analysis, interpretation, and reporting to all stake-
holders that are involved with design and implementation of management,
remediation, and restoration actions...Analysis and interpretation must use
models that integrate knowledge across scales and hydrologic compartments
from the smallest watersheds to the Mississippi and Atchafalaya River Ba-
sins and the Gulf of Mexico. 12
While we discuss today the opportunities provided by the Action Plan and
H.R. 3480, we would be remiss not to bring into focus other issues that could affect
the success of those and similar efforts. The Presidents proposed budget for Fiscal
Year 2003 envisions significant reductions to the budget of the U.S. Geological Sur-
vey. Proposed reductions to funding for USGS Water Programs would negatively im-
pact water data collection, water quality research and assessments, and university-
based education and research related to water systems.
As our discussions today demonstrate so clearly, these proposed reductions are ill-
advised and short-sighted. The work of the USGS and the pressing need for timely
data and sound science dwarf whatever small fiscal gains might be achieved by
cutting those programs, and are far too important to relegate to some unspecified
future date. We need them now, today, and in the future.
The Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan was submitted to Congress in January of 2001. The
change of administrations and the turnover of top-level agency participants on the
Task Force led to virtually no action on implementation being taken during most
of 2001. The Task Force reconvened on February 78, 2002 in St. Louis for a con-
structive and positive meeting at which they reiterated the common ground they
had attained and the resolve to act. Unfortunately, the challenge facing them has
grown significantly. The funding situation at the Federal level is far more com-
plicated than it was a year ago, and most states face budgets that are becoming pro-
gressively tighter.
The Task Force will need to be creative and persistent in its efforts, and they will
need the help of stakeholders as well as state and Federal Governments.
The Mississippi River Basin Alliance is committed to progress on the problem of
hypoxia, and to cooperation throughout the basin on issues that affect the future
of the river and the many people who depend on it, from farmers in the Midwest
to shrimpers on the Louisiana coast.
One of several hopeful notes at the recent St. Louis meeting came from a number
of presentations that were made to the Task Force about innovative strategies for
nutrient management, wetland restoration, and on-farm conservation. 13 There is no
shortage of new ideas coming from universities, non-governmental organizations,
and farmers, but all of them will require monitoring and modeling efforts to gauge
both their effectiveness and how our limited resources can best be spent.
Collaboration and coordination will be essential not only to progress on implemen-
tation of the Action Plan and reduction of Gulf hypoxia, but to improvement of
water quality throughout the basin. One of the most exciting things about the Ac-
tion Plan is that it provides a context for the beginning of basin-wide cooperation
among states in the Mississippi Valley. H.R. 3480 can be an important part of this
wider effort. This is a significant opportunity that should be grasped.

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you very much.

Now we will hear from Ms. Holly Stoerker. Ms. Stoerker, thank
you for being here. We welcome your testimony.

STATEMENT OF HOLLY STOERKER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,

UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN ASSOCIATION
Ms. STOERKER. Thank you.
12 Action Plan, p.25.
13 These included Dr. Donald Hey of the Wetlands Initiative in Chicago, Dr. Suzie Greenhalgh
of World Resources Institute, and Dr.s John Day and Bill Mitsch of Louisiana and Ohio State
Universities, respectively. For a summary of the suite of actions available to address hypoxia,
see the Action Plan as well as Reducing Nitrogen Loading to the Gulf of Mexico from the
Mississippi River Basin: Strategies to Counter a Persistent Ecological Problem, Mitsch, et.al,
Bioscience Vol. 52, No. 5, May 2001.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 33

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of Subcommittee. My

name is Holly Stoerker, and I am the executive director of the
Upper Mississippi River Basin Association, which is an organiza-
tion that was formed 20 years ago by the Governors of the States
that border the upper river, and those would include Minnesota,
Wisconsin, Illinois, Iowa, and Missouri.
I would certainly like to thank Representative Ron Kind for his
leadership in addressing this very important issue of sediment and
nutrients on our basin. I think it has been probably 30 years worth
of reports that I have read about our basin, and every single one
of them lists sedimentation as the single most important problem.
And so in recognition of that, which is both an environmental
problem because it fills in backwater areas on our river, but it is
also an economic problem because the Corps of Engineers has to
dredge a channel for commercial navigation and get that sediment
out of there, so we have an economic and an environmental prob-
lem.
And as Doug Daigle pointed out, we also have an environmental
problem in the Gulf of Mexico with regard to hypoxia, which is, in
large part, caused by nutrients from the Mississippi River Basin.
I am here today on behalf of the States of this basin with a very
simple message, and that is that we need what H.R. 3480 is seek-
ing to do; in particular, an integrated monitoring network, under
the leadership of the U.S. Geological Survey, to monitor nutrients
and sediments in our basin.
We need this for a number of reasons. We need to target our in-
vestments in our basin, our investments in land conservation, in
water quality efforts, and wetlands protection, and to do that we
need good, sound science. And then we need this kind of moni-
toring system so that we can figure out whether those investments
have really made a difference over time, and we are only going to
know that if we keep track of that over time.
At this point, I would like to simply reemphasize the letter that
Representative Kind introduced into the record from six Governors.
This was a letter last October thata tripartisan letter, I should
emphasizefrom last October that the Governors sent to Bush ad-
ministration officials, declaring their support for the actions rec-
ommended in the Hypoxia Action Plan, and, in particular, as Mr.
Kind pointed out, they do, in fact, call for a monitoring effort con-
ducted jointly by the U.S. Geological Survey and the States. Well,
I guess, in my view, that is exactly what H.R. 3480 is, in fact,
seeking to do.
Our organization has testified twice now. This will be the third
time on this bill, previous versions, including an appearance 2
years ago before this Subcommittee, and while the bill has under-
gone a number of changes over this period of time, I think we real-
ly do have a very sound piece of legislation here and one which I
would encourage this Subcommittee to endorse and move quickly
to the House Floor.
Our written testimony, which I guess I assume will be included
in the record
Mr. WALDEN. Yes, it will.
Ms. STOERKER. makes a number of points, specific points,
about the bill, most of which simply set forth the States

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 34

expectations and assumptions, frankly, about how this kind of a

program would be implemented, given the expectation that we are
going to be able to move it forward.
I will let you just simply reflect on those specific points at your
leisure, but before I close, I do want to make one very important
point, and it is one that I think my colleagues here at the table
have already made, which is that establishing a new USGS moni-
toring and modeling program in our basin should not come at the
expense of existing programs and funding.
For example, we cannot assess nutrient and sediment transport
in our rivers and streams unless we have good flow data. And the
USGS Fiscal Year 2003 budget calls for a reduction of $2.1 million
in the National Streamflow Information Program, which is going to
result nationwide in 129 stream gauges being lost, nine of which
are in our basin. Similarly, the cuts to the Toxic Substances Hy-
drology Program, where we are doing current nutrient research, is
particularly devastating.
So I would urge this Committee to also help us on that front to
maintain the good work that the U.S. Geological Survey is already
doing.
And so with that, I will close. Thank you again, and I certainly
underscore our members strong support for this bill.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Stoerker follows:]
Statement of Holly Stoerker, Executive Director, Upper Mississippi River
Basin Association
Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Calvert and Members of the Subcommittee,
for this opportunity to appear before you. My name is Holly Stoerker and I am Exec-
utive Director of the Upper Mississippi River Basin Association (UMRBA). The Gov-
ernors of Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri and Wisconsin formed the UMRBA in
1981 to coordinate the state agencies river-related programs and policies and to
work with Federal agencies on regional issues. On behalf of our member states, I
am quite pleased to offer the following comments regarding the Upper Mississippi
River Basin Protection Act (H.R. 3480).
Overview
The Upper Mississippi River Basin Association (UMRBA) is a strong supporter of
efforts to reduce sediment and nutrients in the basin. As such, the UMRBA enthu-
siastically supports the Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act (H.R. 3480).
The UMRBA applauds the leadership of Representative Ron Kind and the Upper
Mississippi River Congressional Task Force in addressing water resource needs in
the basin and their commitment to providing sound scientific data upon which to
make water resource management decisions. The UMRBA has worked closely with
the sponsors of H.R. 3480 on previous versions of the legislation including
H.R. 4013 in the 106th Congress and H.R. 1800 in the 107th Congress. While H.R
3480 is narrower in scope than its predecessors, it is significantly improved. In large
part, these improvements are the result of Representative Ron Kinds willingness
to work closely with state and Federal water management agencies, as well as
stakeholders in the basin.
The Importance of Monitoring and Modeling
Both sediment and nutrients have a profound affect on the quality of lakes, rivers,
and streams throughout the Upper Mississippi River Basin. Sediment fills in valu-
able wetlands and streams throughout the basin, as well as the unique backwater
habitats and navigation channel of the Mississippi River. Excess nutrients degrade
water quality, impairing rivers and streams and threatening ground water supplies.
In addition, excess nutrients from the Mississippi River Basin have been linked to
oxygen depletion in the Gulf of Mexico, resulting in what is known as Gulf hypoxia.
Meeting these challenges will require significantly enhancing our understanding of
sediment and nutrient sources, mobilization, and transport. The monitoring and
modeling program authorized in H.R. 3480 is not a scientific luxury; it is a manage-
ment imperative. The data and information that results from these efforts will help

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 35
guide Federal, state, and local programs designed to solve the very real problems
of water quality and habitat degradation. Targeting our efforts to restore wetlands,
reduce nonpoint pollution, and help agricultural producers apply best management
practices, depends on good scientific data.
The need for enhanced sediment and nutrient monitoring in the Upper
Mississippi River Basin is widely recognized. In the January 2001 Action Plan for
Reducing, Mitigating, and Controlling Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico,
state and Federal agencies participating in the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Wa-
tershed Nutrient Task Force called for increasing the scale and frequency of moni-
toring of both the extent of the hypoxic zone and the sources of nutrients and condi-
tions of waters throughout the basin. In an October 23, 2001 letter to Bush Admin-
istration officials, six Governors of Mississippi River Basin states urged that Federal
programs to reduce nutrient inputs be enhanced. In this regard, the Governors state
that a monitoring effort conducted jointly by the U.S. Geological Survey and the
states is required within the basin to determine the water quality effects of the ac-
tions taken and to measure the success of efforts on a sub-basin and project level.
H.R. 3480 reflects just the type of increased monitoring effort that has been pro-
posed by both the Task Force and the Governors.
Specific Comments on H.R. 3480
Sediment and Nutrient Monitoring DifferencesThe monitoring network and
modeling efforts described in H.R. 3480 are designed to address both sediment
and nutrients. However, the sources, transport, delivery, and impacts of sedi-
ment and nutrients are not identical and will require different monitoring and
modeling approaches. Moreover, there are natural baseline levels of sediment
and nutrients that would occur without human activity. For many waterbodies
in the basin, acceptable levels of sediment and nutrient impairment have not
been identified. While it may not be necessary for the legislation to explicitly
acknowledge or accommodate these considerations, they will be critical in the
design of the monitoring network and in development of the models. In part,
this is why Section 104 of the bill is a key provision. Section 104 requires that
USGS collaborate with other Federal agencies, states, tribes, local units of gov-
ernment, and private interests in establishing the monitoring network. Such
collaboration should help ensure that the design of the monitoring network
yields data that is relevant to both sediment and nutrient management issues.
Relationship to Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task
ForceThe Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force is
the joint Federal/state body that developed the Hypoxia Action Plan published
in January 2001. At its most recent meeting on February 8, 2002, the Task
Forces Coordination Committee agreed to work with USGS to establish a
framework for nutrient monitoring in the Mississippi River watershed and
Gulf of Mexico. That framework is to be presented to the Task Force at its next
meeting in August 2002. It is our expectation that the monitoring network au-
thorized in H.R. 3480 be designed and implemented consistent with the frame-
work already under development by the Task Force.
CostSharingThe states are pleased that the cost-sharing requirements in
Section 105 provide that up to 80 percent of the nonfederal share may be pro-
vided through in-kind contributions and that existing state and local monitoring
efforts may be applied to the nonfederal share. Given the geographic scope of
the basin and the complex array of potential nonfederal partners, aggregating
contributions to ensure compliance with the bills cost sharing requirements
would seem to pose significant challenges. Nevertheless, it is significant that
H.R. 3480 recognizes the value of state and local monitoring.
Additional New FundingSection 301 of H.R. 3480 authorizes annual appro-
priations of $6.25 million for this new monitoring and modeling effort. It will
be imperative that this funding represent additional new resources rather than
a redirection of existing resources. H.R. 3480 emphasizes integration of existing
monitoring efforts and use of existing data, a strategy that will certainly help
to leverage scarce resources. However, integration of existing efforts is not a
substitute for a real increase in the level of effort. And most importantly, this
increased effort must not come at the expense of other important USGS pro-
grams such as the National Water Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA) or
the National Streamflow Information Program (NSIP). In particular,
streamgaging supported by NSIP provides flow data that will be critical to suc-
cessfully monitoring and modeling sediment and nutrient loads. We cannot af-
ford to lose any of that streamflow data, and in fact will likely need to increase
flow monitoring. It is particularly troubling that, in fact, the Presidents Fiscal
Year 03 budget proposes deep cuts to existing monitoring efforts in the basin,

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 36
including current USGS water programs, as well as the Corps of Engineers
Upper Mississippi River Environmental Management Program. Such cuts will
severely limit USGS ability to undertake the new monitoring responsibilities
proposed in H.R. 3480.
National Research Council AssessmentSection 107 of H.R. 3480 directs the
National Research Council of the Academy of Sciences to conduct a comprehen-
sive water resources assessment of the Upper Mississippi River Basin. In the
context of this legislation, it is our assumption that such an assessment would
be focused on the specific water quality issues associated with sediment and nu-
trients. As such, it would potentially provide important input to the scoping and
implementation of the monitoring and modeling authorized in H.R. 3480.

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you for your testimony. The Committee will
go into recess at this point until after our votes. We have a motion
on a previous question, which tells me we will probably have an-
other one right after that, so it may be 15 or 20 minutes before we
are back. So we will be back, and we look forward to this line of
testimony and then question and answers.
Thank you. We are in recess.
[Recess.]
Mr. WALDEN. I would like to bring the Subcommittee back to
order. We will conclude this mornings hearing with our final wit-
ness, Dr. John McLachlan.
My colleague, Mr. Kind, is on his way back, so please go ahead.
STATEMENT OF JOHN A. McLACHLAN, Ph.D., WEATHERHEAD
DISTINGUISHED PROFESSOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES,
PROFESSOR OF PHARMACOLOGY, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR
BIOENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH, TULANE AND XAVIER
UNIVERSITIES
Mr. MCLACHLAN. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Dr. John
McLachlan, the Weatherhead distinguished professor of environ-
mental studies at Tulane University and director of the Center for
Bioenvironmental Research at Tulane and Xavier Universities in
New Orleans, and we are the founding partner of the Long-Term
Estuary Assessment Group, which acronymsially we call LEAG.
Our Center was founded in 1989 and is a New Orleans-based sci-
entific research and educational partnership between Tulane and
Xavier Universities, focusing on environmental and public health
issues, with particular emphasis on the lower Mississippi River and
the Gulf of Mexico.
In 1999, we teamed with the Navy Office of Oceanographic Re-
search, the Office of Naval Research, the USGS and a variety of
other academic and private organizations to form the Long-Term
Estuary Assessment Group. The purpose is to seek better under-
standing of the complex Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico estuary
system and its resources.
I am here as a representative of just a poor Southern State, and
the poorest of the poor, at the very end of the line of the river, but
we just want to make sure that researchers and people living in
this region, that the down-river aspects and perspectives are put
into H.R. 3480.
So we would like to just thank you sincerely for giving us the op-
portunity to provide these down-river perspectives and to make the
point that we think that any of the Upper Mississippi deliberations

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 37

should be done by involving and having the participation of the

Lower Mississippi River Basin.
We support, as a group, the H.R. 3480. The bill promotes sci-
entific efforts to manage sediment and nutrient loss in the Upper
Mississippi River, with the eventual goal of reducing this load on
the river. These efforts are good for both the Upper and Lower
Mississippi and for the Nation. From a lower river perspective, we
note the following advantages of H.R. 3480:
First, the dead zone. Under natural circumstances, the
Mississippi River delivers nutrients to the Gulf of Mexico, which
stimulate the biological production upon which Gulf fisheries de-
pend. Excess nutrients, namely, nitrogen fertilizers, enable algae
growth in the Gulf to grow to dangerous levels. We support the ef-
forts of H.R. 3480 to reduce the nutrients in the river.
Secondly, in terms of dredging, under natural conditions, sedi-
ments are deposited upon Southern Louisiana during periodic
floods at the rivers mouth. With the construction of flood control
levees, such sediment now accumulates in the river. H.R. 3480
seeks to monitor and eventually reduce sediment load, and we ap-
plaud this.
Third, nonpoint-source pollution. A reduction of sediments and
nutrients in the Upper Mississippi has the parallel benefit of re-
ducing the quantity of agricultural, chemical, household pollutants,
urban runoff and bacteria reaching the river. Less sediment means
fewer particles to which these contaminants can bind. These are all
benefits to the Lower Mississippi region.
From the lower river perspective, we view the impact of
H.R. 3480 as primarily beneficial. We offer a few caveats, not as
problems with the bill, but as suggestions which recognize the con-
nection of the entire river system.
First, what is the optimal level of nutrients for the Gulf? Further
research toward understanding the optimal level of nutrients
reaching the Gulf of Mexico, so as not to create or maintain a dead
zone, can help us set realistic targets in reducing nutrients in the
Upper Mississippi.
Second, sediment flux. Our understanding of sediment flux in the
Lower Mississippi, a river highly controlled by men and artificial
means, will be affected by changes in sediment runoff in the upper
river. Correlating the lower rivers fluxes in sediment and death
with changes in the upper rivers sediment load can aid in our un-
derstanding of how this critically important natural feature func-
tions.
Third, invasive species. Over a decade ago, zebra mussels from
the Caspian Sea arrived in North America via ballast water
dumped by ships in the Great Lakes region. Since then this species
has invaded the entire Mississippi River and are on their way to
New Orleans, causing significant damage to utilities and industrial
facilities. We see the Mississippi as a pathway for biological pollut-
ants, both up and down river, and one that can be costly, as costly
as excess nutrients and sediment.
Fourth, the impact of this bill on Louisianas Freshwater Diver-
sion Projects. To reverse saltwater intrusion and coastal erosion,
Federal and State agencies have constructed several costly fresh-
water diversion projects along the lower river. We suggest that

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 38

H.R. 3480 provide for scientific assessments of the impact of re-

duced sediment and nutrient loads on these freshwater diversions.
Finally, we would propose in our support of the bill that our posi-
tion on the Mississippi in New Orleans offers a unique perspective
on the connection of the entire river system, and we literally live
on the land that has been eroded from the upper basin and drink
the water drained from it.
In this regard, we note for the Subcommittee that our Center is
currently creating a National Center for the Mississippi River in
New Orleans and is actively in partnership with numerous up-river
organizations. In this spirit, we suggest including in H.R. 3480 a
Mississippi River Summit to be held in our nascent National Cen-
ter for the Mississippi River in New Orleans to coordinate research
and activities on both the Upper and the Lower Mississippi Basin.
Thank you very much. I am happy to take questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McLachlan follows:]
Statement of Dr. John McLachlan, Director of the Center for
Bioenvironmental Research, Tulane and Xavier Universities
Introduction
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I am Dr. John McLachlan, Di-
rector of the Center for Bioenvironmental Research (CBR) at Tulane and Xavier
Universities in New Orleans, Louisiana, and founding partner of the LongTerm Es-
tuary Assessment Group (LEAG).
Background of CBR and LEAG
Founded in 1989, the CBR is a New Orleans-based scientific research and edu-
cation partnership between Tulane and Xavier Universities, focusing on environ-
mental and public health issues with a particular emphasis on the lower Mississippi
River region. The CBR specializes in researching the ecological and human-health
impact of chemical pollutants, environmental and geological conditions of the lower
Mississippi River and Gulf of Mexico, environmental signals and sensors, and re-
lated issues such as biosensor technology, invasive species, long-term stewardship
of contained pollutants, and information technology for environmental management.
World renowned for its progressive, multidisciplinary research on aquatic eco-
systems, the CBR has a full-time staff of 27 employees and over 80 affiliated re-
searchers in fields ranging from biology to geology, from toxicology to engineering.
Current and upcoming funding for the CBR comes from the Department of Energy,
Office of Naval Research, U.S. Geological Survey, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Department of Health and Human Services, and private foundations.
In 1999, the CBR teamed with the Naval Oceanographic Office, National Oceano-
graphic and Atmospheric Administration, and a number of academic, state, and pri-
vate organizations to form the LongTerm Estuary Assessment Group (LEAG).
LEAG (described as the Lower Estuary Assessment Group in H.R. 3480) seeks a
scientific understanding of the complex Mississippi River / Gulf of Mexico estuary
system, how it functions, its resources and threats to its health, and how it can help
develop technologies and systems for the benefit of the nation. LEAG views the
Mississippi River / Gulf of Mexico estuary as one of Americas greatest natural lab-
oratories, offering nationally important resources and reflecting the activities of mil-
lions of Americans in a vast drainage basin.
As researchers of the lower Mississippi River, the CBR and LEAG offer unique
perspectives on the Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act of 2001
(H.R. 3480).
Upper Mississippi River Basin Protection Act of 2001: Our Perspective from
Downriver
We support H.R. 3480. H.R. 3480 promotes scientific efforts to manage sediment
and nutrient loss in the upper Mississippi River and Illinois River basinsthat is,
those parts of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Iowa, and Missouri draining into these
rivers between Cairo, Illinois and the headwaters of the Mississippi.
Specifically, H.R. 3480 establishes an integrated program to monitor and model
the nutrient and sediment load of the upper Mississippi River, with the ultimate

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 39
goals of reducing (1) the erosion of these resources from the upper basin and (2) the
releases of these constituents to the lower Mississippi and the extended estuary of
the Gulf of Mexico.
We offer here our perspectivesas scientists and residents of the lowest part of
the Mississippi Riveron the benefits of this bill, as well as our suggestions and
recommendations for improving it. But more importantly, we wish to communicate
to the Subcommittee the importance of keeping those Americans living along the
lower Mississippi River involved and participating in upperMississippi legislation
and management, for, as we all know, downriver communities feel each and every
impact upon the river, for better or worse.
While the focus of this bill is the upper Mississippi River basin, its impact will
be felt equally, if not more so, by those Americans who live along the lower
Mississippi River, and whose quality of life depends in no small part on the environ-
mental health of the Mississippi River / Gulf of Mexico estuary.
We offer these observations of this billthe pros and consfrom our downriver
perspective, as scientists researching the Delta region, and as residents of the New
Orleans area, a city whose land base was created by the Mississippi, whose economy
is dependent on the Mississippi, and whose unique culture is largely a product of
the Mississippi.
The Pros
From a lower-river perspective, we see the following pros of H.R. 3480:
1. Dead Zone
Under natural circumstances, the Mississippi River delivers nutrients to the Gulf
of Mexico, which stimulate the biological production upon which gulf fisheries de-
pend. Too much of a good thing, however, is harmful: excess nitrogen fertilizers run-
ning off upper Mississippi Basin farms enable algae in the Gulf of Mexico to grow
to dangerous levels. As the algae die and decompose, they lower oxygen levels in
the Gulf (hypoxia), which kills or drives away animal life, including commercially
important seafood and sport fish. This hypoxic Dead Zone forms annually and at-
tracts the attention of the media and public. It effects the lower Mississippi / Gulf
of Mexico estuary region in the following ways:
decreases health and extent of commercial fisheries, an industry estimated to
be worth $2.8 billion annually in coastal Louisiana;
increases growth of certain algae blooms which are harmful to marine organisms
and humans;
disrupts gulf ecology by eliminating longer-lived species and bottom-dwellers,
and shifting productivity to non-hypoxic periods and places;
decreases recreational fishing opportunities, worth $1.6 billion annually in coast-
al Louisiana..
We do not yet know the optimal quantity of river nutrients needed for the ecologi-
cal health of the Gulf of Mexico, but the efforts of H.R. 3480 to address this re-
search need, and its ultimate goal of reducing excessive nutrients in the river, are
positive benefits from the downriver perspective.
2. Dredging
Under natural conditions, sediments carried by the Mississippi River are depos-
ited upon the deltaic landscape during periodic floods (thus creating southern Lou-
isiana) or deposited at the mouth of the Mississippi River. With the construction of
levees for flood control starting in the early 1700s, these sediments no longer replen-
ished the lands of southern Louisiana, instead accumulating in and along the river
and eventually at its mouth. As a major commercial waterway hosting 400,000,000
tons of traffic annually, sections of the lower Mississippi (particularly the passes at
the rivers mouth) must now be dredged repeatedly by the Federal Government for
the maintenance of shipping lanes. The Army Corps of Engineers districts respon-
sible for the river from St. Louis to the mouth have spent an average of $84,000,000
annually since 1995 on dredging. In some cases, dredging may stir up pollutants
bound to sediment particles at the bottom of the river. Sediment build-up is also
burdensome to flood-control infrastructure in Louisiana, particularly the Old River
Control Structure and spillways, as well as riverside wharves, docks, and industries.
The monitoring of sediment flux in the upper river, and ultimately the reduction
of sediment load in the river, are both encouraged by H.R. 3480. We perceive these
as benefits to the lower Mississippi River region.
3. NonpointSource Pollution
A reduction of sediments and nutrients in the upper Mississippi has the parallel
benefit of reducing the quantity of pesticides, herbicides, agricultural feed stock,
household pollutants, chemicals on urban surfaces, and bacteria originating from

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 40
municipal, agricultural, and industrial sources. Less sediment means fewer particles
to which these contaminants can bind. These are all benefits to the lower
Mississippi River region.
The Cons
From a lower-river perspective, we view the impact of H.R. 3480 as primarily
beneficial. We offer these cons not as problems with the bill or concerns about its
impact on the lower river, but as suggestions which recognize the connectivity of the
entire river system.
1. Optimal Level of Nutrients Reaching the Gulf
Further research toward understanding the optimal level of nutrients reaching
the Gulf of Mexicoso as not to create a Dead Zonecan help scientists and man-
agers set realistic targets in reducing nutrients in the upper Mississippi. More re-
search is needed in this area.
2. Sediment Flux
That the Mississippi is a vast transporter of eroded sediments to the Gulf of Mex-
ico is complicated by its high level of human control, especially in its lower half and
particularly in its last 200 miles. Our work in understanding sediment flux in the
lower river will be affected by changes in sediment runoff in the upper river. This
too needs to be further researched. Correlating the lower rivers fluxes in sediment
and depth with changes in the upper rivers sediment load can aid in our under-
standing of how this critically important natural feature functions.
3. Invasive Species
Over a decade ago, zebra mussels from the Caspian and Black Seas arrived to
North America via ballast water dumped by ships in the Great Lakes region. Since
then, this introduced species has invaded the Mississippi River down to New Orle-
ans and beyond, causing significant damage to utilities, shipping, and industrial fa-
cilities along the banks of the Mississippi. Scraping mussels from pipes in the Great
Lakes region alone costs between $50 to $100 million a year. Here we see the
Mississippi as a pathway for a biological pollutant, one that can be as costly as ex-
cess nutrients and sediment. We suggest that H.R. 3480, with its monitoring and
modeling directives, also seize the opportunity to study invasive species in the
Mississippi River system, so that costly invasions may be prevented in the future.
4. Impact on Louisianas FreshWater Diversion Projects
To reverse the intrusion of salt water upon Louisiana wetlands and to combat the
states severe coastal-erosion problem (caused in large part by the manmade levees
constriction of the river from depositing sediments beyond its banks), Federal and
state agencies have constructed two major fresh-water diversion projects along the
lower river in Louisiana, with more planned. Total costs are well in the hundreds
of millions of dollars. The aim of these immense engineering projects is to emulate,
as best as modern-day conditions permit, the historic tendency of the river to over-
flow its banks, deposit its sediments in the backswamp, enrich the wetlands with
its nutrients, and push back intruding salt water from the gulf with a plume of
fresh river water. We suggest that H.R. 3480 provide for scientific assessments of
the impact of reduced sediment and nutrient loads on these fresh-water diversions.
5. A Mississippi River Summit in New Orleans
Our position on the Mississippi in New Orleans offers us a unique perspective of
the connectivity of the upper and lower river, not to mention its tributaries and sub-
basins. We literally live on land eroded from the upper basin and drink the water
drained from it. In this regard, we note to the Subcommittee that the CBR is cur-
rently creating a National Center for the Mississippi River in New Orleans, and is
actively partnering (through Memoranda of Understanding) with upper-river organi-
zations such the Science Museum of Minnesota, St. Louis Science Center, Illinois
State Museum, Mississippi River Museum of Dubuque, Iowa, the Upper Mississippi
River Citizens Commission of Winona, MN, and Mississippi River Basin Alliance.
In this spirit, we suggest including in H.R. 3480 a Mississippi River Summit to
be held at the nascent National Center for the Mississippi River, to coordinate re-
search and activities on both the upper and lower river.
Conclusions
The CBR and LEAG support H.R. 3480. We see in this bill the benefits of moni-
toring and modeling toward the reduction of sediment and nutrients in the
Mississippithus reducing the size, intensity, and frequency of the Dead Zone in
the Gulf of Mexico, the need to dredge the river, and the quantity of pollution in
our water supply. But we also stress that upper-river legislation impacts the lower

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 41
river, and that H.R. 3480 can be more effective by addressing the connectivity of
the entire river. LEAG, as a partnership of government, academia, and private
groups involved in monitoring and modeling the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico es-
tuary, is an ideal entity for conducting such activity.
I thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the CBR and LEAG.

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you, Doctor.

We appreciate the testimony of all of our panelists today. I am
going to start with some questions of Mr. McMillen regarding
House Resolution 3606.
Mr. McMillen, I wonder, just looking through the information
that was provided to me about a project that has been going on out
there for some time, and the participating agencies are numerous
on this sheet. Can you tell me about the role of the local Bureau
of Reclamation has played in your discussions and perhaps other
Federal agencies too?
Mr. MCMILLEN. Certainly. That list of participating agencies, the
local stakeholders organized stakeholder meetings and invited all
of those agencies, of which the Bureau was part of that.
The Bureau has been involved in conservation fish passage
projects in the valley since as early as 1984. There was a study
done in the upper valley looking at consolidation and turning
ditches into pipelines, those type of things. It was about a $20-mil-
lion project that reached very final stages before it was basically
put on the shelf because of lack of public support.
We have worked with the Bureau. The Bureau has been in the
lower valley, the Lostine part of the project, over the last 10 years,
doing the same type of work, conservation of fish passage.
The infrastructure, which is Phase III of this project, what it is
designed to do is to provide water in the irrigation system, leave
the Lostine River water in the Lostine for Endangered Species. The
Bureau has done all of that preliminary engineering work. We have
not been involved.
However, that part of the project is not feasible unless the dam
is rehabbed to provide about 3,500 to 4,000 acre-feet of storage for
that water exchange. That is what the Associated Ditch Companies
has already got agreement from their participating farmers to per-
manently allocate that to the Federal Government for that water
exchange. So there is a Federal participation and Federal owner-
ship issue with this, and that is in the storage itself.
So it has been ongoing at the Bureau. The Corps of Engineers
have been involved, the National Marine Fisheries Service. Every
Federal agency that has any interest in this project was invited
and has been in attendance to three stakeholder meetings. That
started about 2 years ago.
Mr. WALDEN. And they are supportive of the concept that you
have laid out?
Mr. MCMILLEN. Yes. This project actually falls right in line with
the biological opinion of the National Marine Fisheries Service and
the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, looking for basically off-river miti-
gation, both for the Bureau and the Corps projects. This is a total
watershed approach for basically protecting and enhancing endan-
gered species.
Mr. WALDEN. Have any of these Federal agencies that embraced
and helped create this plan stepped forward to say we will help

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 42

fund it, in terms of the major element, which is the dam restora-
tion?
Mr. MCMILLEN. No, they have not. The Corps of Engineers was
approached. They also have funding limitations in their current
programs. They do have some money available for fish passage. We
have approached Bonneville Power Administration, and they are
interested, through their normal funding process of providing fund-
ing, matching funds, to help with the fish restoration aspects, fish
passage at the dams.
Mr. WALDEN. What about the State of Oregonsince, you know,
the commissioner referenced that in his testimony, the Dam Safety
Study that was done thereis the State of Oregon stepping for-
ward to help finance this?
Mr. MCMILLEN. The State of Oregon, back in 1995, when they
issued, in 1996, they issued a letter basically listing this as a high-
hazard structure. We brought them in. We actually put together a
complete funding evaluation, looking at State grant, Federal
money, everything we could find, and the State has no money
available for this scale of a project. That was evaluated.
Mr. WALDEN. So, if you have no State funding and you have no
Federal funding, what are your prospects?
Mr. MCMILLEN. We have none.
Mr. WALDEN. In terms of even keeping the dam safe?
Mr. MCMILLEN. No. Because if you look at the cost of being able
to replace the structure and the payback, it is beyond the ability
of the agricultural community that is currently there.
Mr. WALDEN. Do you know the population of the ag community,
the patrons in this district?
Mr. MCMILLEN. The total population in the valley, there are 400
shareholders that directly pull water out of irrigation, there is
about another 200 shareholder farmers that get it through sec-
ondary use.
Mr. WALDEN. So maximum is 600 people you estimate
Mr. MCMILLEN. Six hundred farmers, yes.
Mr. WALDEN. farmers, $32 million?
Mr. MCMILLEN. That is correct. Let me clarify a little bit on that.
The dam rehabilitation, which is Phase I, is about $7 million, and
the rest of it is related to fishery restoration and hydropower.
We did look into trying to do a private financing, look at a rate
gain, and it is just very difficult, in the current agriculture econo-
mies, to be able to pay that back.
Mr. WALDEN. Thank you. My time has expired.
Mr. Kind?
Mr. KIND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to thank, again, the witnesses for your testimony
today and for the help that you provided with the drafting of the
legislation. We worked closely with many of you, and we look for-
ward to working closely as this moves forward and as we better in-
tegrate the planning at all levels on what we can do to sustain the
river basin.
Dr. Schnoor, I appreciated the opportunity of co-chairing that
working group that we had last year in regards to the Mississippi
through the National Research Council. As you are aware, in this
legislation it would call for funding of the National Research

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 43

Council, the National Academy of Sciences, an assessment of the

river basin.
Could you explain to us the importance of that and whether you
have had some expertise in this area and other watershed areas in
providing such an assessment.
Mr. SCHNOOR. Yes, we think the assessment is important, and
the National Research Council is prepared to go ahead with that,
should H.R. 3480 become law. The National Research Council, as
you know, is the operating arm of the National Academy of
Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering and the Institutes
of Medicine. It was chartered by Congress in 1863 to advise the
Government on matters of science and technology.
We are prepared to go ahead with an assessment of the Upper
Mississippi River Valley Protection Act, if this passes, through the
Water, Science and Technology Board, of which I am a member.
Unfortunately, he had another meeting and had to leave, but
Steven Parker, who is the staff director of that group, was here
earlier and is very much interested and feels this is a strong need
of the NRC to do an assessment like this, and the chairman of our
committee is Richard Luthy from Stanford University, and he
agrees as well.
Mr. KIND. What would be the goal of the assessment? What
would you be trying to produce?
Mr. SCHNOOR. We would produce basically a book in about a 2-
year period, six to eight meetings, in which some of the Nations
experts in the area of water quality would behold the literature
and would be brought together as sort of initiation, I would say, to
all of the research in monitoring and modeling required under
3480. So it is kind of a kick-off assessment and book of where we
stand right now.
Mr. KIND. Thank you.
Mr. Daigle, I understand that you recently participated in a con-
ference in St. Louis involving many of the shareholders that are
going to be working to be implement the interagency action plan.
Was there any discussion or talk about the importance of moni-
toring and getting good models in place in regards to the action
plan at that conference?
Mr. DAIGLE. Yes, that was the meeting of the Gulf Hypoxia Task
Force, the first time it has been convened under the Bush adminis-
tration, and that was a real key theme that came out from people
all along the river.
The representatives of the task force are from Federal agencies
and the States, and the secretary of the Minnesota Pollution Con-
trol Agency made a very strong point that she supports doing this,
but she has got to have the monitoring funding. It is just critical
for all of the water quality groups.
Mr. KIND. Thank you.
Ms. Stoerker, you had a chance to listen to Director Hirschs tes-
timony, and he raised a concern in regards to the cost sharing that
is contained in the legislation. I know you had some input in re-
gards to the States perspective, at least given your position there
in regards to the cost sharing. Could you quickly explain why you
think the cost sharing contained in this legislation is workable and
important.

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 44

Ms. STOERKER. Sure. Two points I think worth making in that

regard. One is that the States, as many of you are aware, are in
dire financial straits. Mr. Daigle just mentioned the fact that the
commissioner of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency made a
passionate plea for this program earlier in February. She was hop-
ing to be at this hearing, but could not leave the State because she
has to lay off 150 employees this week.
The second point I think worth making about cost sharing, from
the States point of view, is that the Mississippi River is very much
a national river, and we have a tremendous Federal influence on
that river. The Corps of Engineers, a Federal agency, needs to
dredge, and so forth. So I think there is a very unique kind of Fed-
eral interest in that system, which does not suggest that the States
should not come up to the plate and participate as cost-share part-
ners. I think they are eager to do that. I think that there are going
to be some practical, as well as kind of public policy, concerns
about that.
Mr. KIND. Thank you.
And, finally, Dr. McLachlan, I was particularly interested in
hearing your feedback on this and the support for the legislation,
given your perspective from the Lower Mississippi region. And I be-
lieved from the very beginning that we need to start dealing with
the Mississippi River Basin as one continuous ecosystem and start
coordinating and managing the plans is that we view it as one, con-
tinuous, flowing ecosystem. And that is probably the best hope we
have of seeing significant change and improvement in the area, and
I appreciate your interest in this legislation.
Could you speak briefly on the importance, in your view, of bet-
ter cooperation and collaboration between the Upper Miss region
and the Southern Miss region.
Mr. MCLACHLAN. The Upper and Lower Mississippi is more of a
political distinction than a real distinction, and everything that
happens in one part of the river system is expressed in the other.
When I started working in New Orleans 7 years ago, when I
moved to TulaneI was in the Federal Government before then
I told my mother once, who still lives in Pittsburgh, that every-
thing she does I will find out about 2 weeks later, so she should
be careful.
[Laughter.]
Mr. MCLACHLAN. And I think that that is more or less the sense
of connectedness not only in the ecosystem, but just as we have ex-
pressed here. Every time people who are working on the river get
together, we establish other connections, either through websites or
interactive science museums. So I think there is almost a kind of
a groundswell of interest in river research, river education that
was not there really 5 or 6 years ago.
I should also say that in terms of our national commitment to
homeland defense and concern, that most of the academic centers
studying water have been focused outwardly on oceanography, and
that in some ways one should start to look for strips or a Woods
Hole of the river in the riverine systems, which now are so impor-
tant not only to our defense, but really to our livelihood, and I
think that one way to do that also would be to assure that the
USGS budget and the other agencies that are so critically involved

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1
 45

in river strength and maintenance would certainly be kept at a

high level.
Thank you.
Mr. KIND. Thank you again. I thank all of the witnesses for your
interest in this and your testimony today. As I said, as we move
forward with the legislation, I look forward to working with you in
the future.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That is all I have.
Mr. WALDEN. Thank you.
I also want to thank the witnesses for your valuable testimony
and Mr. Kind for joining us today.
The members of the Subcommittee, some of whom obviously
arent here today, may have some additional questions they want
to submit to the witnesses, and we would ask that you respond to
those in writing. The hearing record will be held open for these re-
sponses until March 21st of 2002.
If there is no further business before the Subcommittee, the
Chairman again thanks the members of the Committee and our
witnesses, and without objection the Subcommittee now stands ad-
journed.
[Whereupon, at 11:20 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

VerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:34 Dec 10, 2002 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6011 78048.TXT HRESOUR1 PsN: HRESOUR1