Forest list archive: msg00072

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Proposal to destroy the lower Gila River forever



Letter from the Southwest Center for Biological Diversity to the U.S. 
Army Corps of Engineers:









									
October 26, 1994



Colonel Michael Robinson
Commander  
Los Angeles District Army Corps of Engineers

Mr. Alex Watt
Environmental Protection Specialist
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
PO Box 2711
Los Angeles, CA  90053-2325

Dear Colonel Robinson and Mr. Watt,

Re: Illegal "Finding of No Significant Impact" by the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers for the proposed Wellton-Mohawk Gila River Flood Channel 
Restoration Project 

	The Southwest Center for Biological Diversity (SWCBD) is a 
non-profit, public interest, conservation organization whose mission is 
to conserve imperiled native species and their threatened habitat and to 
fulfill the continuing educational goals of our membership and the 
general public in the process.
	Ninety-five per cent of Arizona's rivers have been destroyed by 
dams, conversion to agricultural lands, water diversion projects, urban 
encroachment, cattle grazing, and excessive ground water pumping.  As 
living barometers of the condition of our rivers, not surprisingly, 
Arizona's native fish are in serious trouble.
	Of Arizona's 34 original native fish species, one (the Monkey 
Springs pupfish) is extinct, one (the Yaqui sucker) has been extirpated, 
twelve are federally recognized as endangered with extinction, six are 
federally recognized as threatened with extinction, and 11 are recognized 
as candidates for federal protection.  Only one native Arizona fish, the 
bluehead sucker, has not yet been recommended for federal protection.
	The State of Arizona has also acknowledged concern about the 
survival of its native fish.  The State of Arizona has acknowledged that 
the status of Arizona's native fish is so serious that it recognizes 17 
as endangered with extinction, seven as threatened with extinction, and 
two as candidates for State protection.
	Rehabilitation and protection of river habitat for the recovery 
of Arizona's struggling native fish species is critical at this 
historical juncture if any native fish species, and ultimately, if the 
rivers themselves, are to survive.  The lower Gila River represents one 
of the few remaining areas in the Southwest where rehabilitation of a 
degraded river system can readily be accomplished.  The successful 
reestablishment of cottonwoods and willows as the result of the 1993 
floods are proof of the rehabilitation potential for the area.
	Southwestern rivers, such as the Gila River, are characterized by 
late winter and early spring flooding.  Spring flooding is especially 
important to the survival of a mature willow-cottonwood forest.  
Flooding, erosion, scouring and siltation are natural processes in the 
Southwest, also.  The resultant meandering through a dynamically changing 
river channel characterizes the historic behavior of Southwestern rivers.
	The formation and decline of oxbows are also part of the natural 
and dynamic process.  The oxbows often develop into marshes, which are 
successional, or which fill and degrade, as the river channel moves.
	Episodic disturbance is the primary characteristic that favors 
native species.  Channelization of the roughly 60 miles of Gila River 
between Wellton and Mohawk and continued operation of the Painted Rock 
Dam for the singularly, self-serving benefit of the Wellton-Mohawk 
Irrigation District (District) will foreclose the option of recovery for 
the lower Gila River forever.
	The SWCBD has reviewed the Public Notice of Permit Application, 
the Draft Environmental Assessment, and the Draft Mitigation Plan for the 
proposed Wellton-Mohawk Gila River Flood Channel Restoration Project 
(Project).  We have also completed a very recent aerial reconnaissance of 
the project area and surrounding areas.
	The proposed Project will channelize 56.2 miles of river, will 
move 5.7 million cubic yards of material and will place 1 million yards 
of rip-rap along the insides of the dikes.  According to Arizona 
Department of Environmental Quality, it will be the "largest [project] in 
terms of area of impact of any 404 Permit in Arizona."  The proposed cost 
of the Project is $13.7 million.
	Since the 1940's, the operation of the District has been an 
environmental disaster, as well as an unfair economic burden for the 
nation as a whole.  The premise that the lower Gila River will be 
protected or even needs to be protected by a massive channelization, 
dike, and levee project is an insult to reason, as well as to the 
taxpayers already overburdened pocketbooks.  The District has been 
maintained historically by controversial taxpayer subsidies.  These 
subsidies have included an expensive drainage system to collect sumpwater 
and carry it away, artificially low electricity rates, commodity price 
supports, and a non-functional $258 million desalinization plant.  In 
summary, the District has been a controversial boondoggle for half a 
century.  The proposed Project will only prolong this travesty.
	In the Draft Mitigation Plan, the District and the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers (Corps) estimate the "Acquisition and Dedication of 
Lands" at $300/acre.  If the Corps' and the District's own estimates are 
accurate, 45,666.67 acres of land could be purchased for a flood easement 
for the proposed Project's estimated $13.7 million cost!  The purchase of 
flood prone land for an adequate easement would certainly yield much 
better benefits to the general public, and will not foreclose future 
recovery options.
	The proposed summary finding by the Corps of a "Finding of No 
Significant Impact" ("FONSI") is not only inaccurate, it will also be 
illegal.  Such an inappropriate conclusion will violate the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
	Specifically, a conclusion of a "FONSI" for the Project will be 
in violation of the fact that all agencies of the Federal Government shall:

"...include in every recommendation or report on proposals for 
legislation and other major Federal Actions significantly affecting the 
quality of the human environment, a detailed statement by the responsible 
official on - (i) the environmental impact of the proposed action, (ii) 
any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the 
proposal be implemented, (iii) alternatives to the proposed action...(iv) 
any irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the 
proposed action should it be implemented." (42 USC 4332)

Furthermore, the following NEPA implementing regulations are also being 
ignored:

"(a)...the significance of an action must be analyzed in several contexts 
such as society as a whole (human, national), the affected region, the 
affected interests, and the locality...Both short- and long-term effects 
are relevant...(b)...The following should be considered in evaluating 
intensity:...(1)...A significant effect may exist even if the Federal 
agency believes that on balance the effect will be beneficial...(3)... 
wetlands... ecologically critical areas...(4) The degree to which the 
effects on the quality of the human environment are likely to be highly 
controversial...(6) The degree to which the action may establish a 
precedent for future actions with significant effect or represents a 
decision in principle about a future consideration...(7) Whether the 
action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but 
cumulatively significant impacts.  Significance exists if it is 
reasonable to anticipate a cumulatively significant impact on the 
environment.  Significance cannot be avoided by terming an action 
temporary or by breaking it down or by breaking it down into small 
component parts..." (40 C.F.R. 1508.27) 

	Should the Corps still choose to conclude a "FONSI" for this 
Project, please notify us immediately before any irretrievable commitment 
of resources has taken place.  If indeed you do conclude a "FONSI," we 
intend to seek injunctional judicial relief.  Please contact SWCBD via 
Robin Silver, M.D., Conservation Chair, SWCBD, PO Box 39629, Phoenix, AZ  
85069, Ph: (602) 246 4170, FAX: (602) 249 2576.

							Sincerely,


							Robin Silver, M.D.
							Conservation Chair


cc:	Mark Hughes, Esq., Earthlaw staff attorney



3









[Metla] [Main Index] [Thread Index]

Mail converted by MHonArc 1.1.0