Missouri River Planning Recognizing and Incorporating Sediment Management (2011) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Missouri River Governance: Institutions, Laws, and Policies for Managing Sediment and Related Resources
3 Missouri River Governance: Institutions, Laws, and Policies for Managing Sediment and Related Resources
Pages 51-66
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 51... ...
The Pick-Sloan legislation included two other goals important to future management of Missouri River resources: recreation, and fish and wildlife protection. These uses over time would frequently come into conflict with the dominant interests of hydropower, water supply, navigation, and flood control.
|
From page 52... ...
Examples of these latter interests include water-based recreation on the National Wild and Scenic River segments in Montana and on the National Recreational River segments in Nebraska and South Dakota, which were developed in response to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968. Moreover, under the Endangered Species Act the Corps must comply with legal requirements to protect federally listed native species from extinction as a consequence of their actions and recover and maintain their populations by removing or lessening threats of their actions to the species' survival.
|
From page 53... ...
In many ways the Corps remains the focal point of Missouri River management; but as this chapter describes, its authority to make decisions is now shared with others, especially the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
|
From page 54... ...
. In order to mitigate these effects, the Congress directed a Corps study that resulted in the 1984 report, "Missouri River Bank Stabilization and Navigation Project, Final Feasibility Report and Final EIS for the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plan." The Missouri River Mitigation Plan was subsequently authorized under the Water Resources Development Acts of 1986 (Public Law 99-662)
|
From page 55... ...
Endangered Species Act The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) , passed in 1973, puts responsibility on federal action agencies to comply with, not just consider, recommendations of federal wildlife agencies to minimize or avoid the impact of federal activities on endangered species.
|
From page 56... ...
A biological opinion issued by the Fish and Wildlife Service in 2000 under authority granted by the Endangered Species Act, along with a supplemental opinion in 2003, has directed Corps of Engineers habitat construction plans and other activities along the Missouri River -- especially downstream of Gavins Point Dam.
|
From page 57... ...
The two agencies then collaborated to develop a Biological Opinion, and in 2000 the Fish and Wildlife Service issued a Biological Opinion that contained a description of current river operations, current status of the species, an environmental baseline, and a conclusion that the referenced Corps actions were likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the least tern, piping plover, and pallid sturgeon, but would not jeopardize the bald eagle. The Fish and Wildlife Service further concluded that to avoid jeopardizing the continued existence of the tern, plover, and sturgeon, it was necessary to (1)
|
From page 58... ...
IV.B.) The Fish and Wildlife Service issued a Supplemental Biological Opinion
|
From page 59... ...
It describes the Mainstem Reservoir System, including its Water Control Plan, and establishes operational policy for the multiple project purposes of flood control, hydropower, water supply, water quality, irrigation, navigation, recreation, and fish and wildlife. The Corps first undertook revision of the original 1960 Master Manual in 1989 when the basin was experiencing its first major drought since the system became operational.
|
From page 60... ...
This Missouri River Recovery Program is a comprehensive effort, led by the Corps in partnership with the Fish and Wildlife Service, tribes, states, other federal agencies, and nongovernmental organizations, to develop and implement actions to recover the Missouri River. The MRRP vision is for "a sustainable ecosystem supporting thriving populations of native species while providing for current social and economic values." Its mission is to "implement actions to accomplish Missouri River ecosystem recovery goals in coordination and collaboration with agency partners and stakeholders." Recovery efforts are coordinated by the Corps with funding that flows through the Corps budget (see http://
|
From page 61... ...
Missouri River Ecosystem Restoration Plan The Missouri River Ecosystem Restoration Plan was authorized under the 2007 Water Resources Development Act for the purpose of conducting a collaborative, long-term ecosystem restoration study. Under MRERP, the Secretary of the Army, in consultation with a stakeholder advisory group (MRRIC)
|
From page 62... ...
Missouri River Recovery Implementation Committee In the Water Resources Development Act of 2007, the Secretary of the Army was directed to establish a Missouri River Recovery Implementation Committee (MRRIC) composed of federal, state, tribal, and nongovernmental stakeholders.
|
From page 63... ...
The purpose and scope of the MRRIC is threefold. First, the MRRIC makes recommendations and provides guidance on the Missouri River Ecosystem Recovery Plan, which, as noted above, includes mitigating losses of aquatic and terrestrial habitat, recovering federally listed species, and restoring the Missouri River ecosystem to prevent further declines among other native species.
|
From page 64... ...
THE CLEAN WATER ACT, STATE WATER QUALITY RULES, AND SEDIMENT In considering sediment management on the Missouri River, it is important to understand not only provisions of the Endangered Species Act, but also provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA) , especially the setting of ambient water quality standards for sediment and phosphorus concentrations.
|
From page 65... ...
, it is possible to develop water quality criteria that are consistent with the Clean Water Act and that do not conflict with Biological Opinion requirements for the Missouri River. For example, closer investigation of the legislative history and origins of the Clean Water Act show that it long has been recognized that historic watershed conditions can be a template for setting water quality uses and criteria.
|
From page 66... ...
At the same time, the Corps of Engineers retains authority to operate the Missouri River dam and reservoir system. These many changes have complicated the Missouri River governance structure for the Corps and others as they try to reach agreement on programs such as Biological Opinion program implementation, broader ecosystem recovery, and sediment management planning.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.