YAZOO PUMPS- HERE WE GO AGAIN

[Hammer]

ALL RIGHTY THEN YOU STINKING GENUISES...MY OPENING MOVE IS THE SCIENCE, THE WHOLE SCIENCE AND NOTHING BUT THE SCIENCE....YOU HAVE PROVEN AMAZINGLY CREATIVE IN DENYING THE SCIENCE OF GLOBAL WARMING DESPITE THE OVERWHELMING SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS AND YOUR COMPLETE LACK OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE OR TRAINING SO I AM SURE YOU WILL FIND SIMILAR RATIONALIZATIONS TO DENY THE TRUTH ON YAZOO PUMPS TOO...GO AHEAD- ENTERTAIN ME WITH YOUR RIDICULOUS, INFANTILE TAKES ON THIS SORRY, ROTTEN EXCUSE OF A SO CALLED FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT BUT DO SO WITH THE FRONT END KNOWLEDGE THAT 541 WETLAND AND AQUATIC SCIENTISTS ARE ON THE RECORD AGAINST THE PUMPS PROJECT.

Scientists Oppose Yazoo Backwater Pumping Plant

December 10, 2007

Stephen L. Johnson
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington DC 20240

Dirk Kempthorne
Secretary
U.S. Department of the Interior
Ariel Rios Building (Mail Code: 1101A) 1849 C Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460

Dear Administrator Johnson and Secretary Kempthorne:

We write to urge you to take all steps necessary to prevent the destruction of vital wetlands by a project currently being evaluated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), the Yazoo Backwater Pumping Plant in Mississippi (Yazoo Pumps).

The undersigned are 541 wetland and aquatic scientists and professionals, including 144 Ph.D.’s, from 46 states, the District of Columbia, and seven foreign countries. We have broad knowledge and expertise in wetland ecosystems, including their physical structure, chemistry, and biology. Many of us have written extensively on the ecology, water quality, and biota of wetlands; participated on National Academy of Sciences boards; and led national and international scientific natural resource organizations, including those involved in wetlands.

In 2000, the Environmental Protection Agency concluded that the Yazoo Pumps would drain and damage more than 200,000 acres of ecologically significant wetlands in the heart of the Mississippi River flyway. The Corps recently announced that 26,300 acres of wetlands would be drained to the point of becoming non-jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act (FWCA
Report 2006). The Corps also announced that at least 40,700 additional acres would see changes in the duration or depth of saturation or flooding. Such changes can produce potentially “massive changes in species composition and richness and in ecosystem productivity” (Mitsch and Gosselink 1993).

Wetland losses at this scale would have catastrophic implications for the ecology of the region and for the fish and wildlife resources entrusted to the care of the Department of the Interior. As noted by the Fish and Wildlife Service, the area that will be drained by the Yazoo Pumps
“contains some of the richest natural resources in the nation including a highly productive floodplain fishery, one of only a few remaining examples of the bottomland hardwood forest ecosystem which once dominated the Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley, and is one of only four
remaining backwater ecosystems with a hydrological connection with the Mississippi River” (FWCA Report 2006).

The Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley has already lost 80 percent of its original wetlands. The majority of those losses have been traced directly to the effects of federal flood control and drainage projects (Department of the Interior 1988). This pattern of abuse must end. The natural system cannot afford the loss of an additional 26,300 to 200,000 acres of wetlands and the many services that they provide.

The wetlands that would be drained and damaged by the Yazoo Pumps:

• Provide vital fish and wildlife habitat. Wetlands are some of the most biologically productive natural ecosystems in the world, and are comparable to tropical rain forests and
coral reefs in their productivity and the diversity of species they support (EPA 2001). Wetlands allow the development of organisms that form the base of the food web, produce tremendous quantities of food, and provide water and shelter for a host of species. A majority of fish species, one-third of all U.S. bird species, and many species of amphibians
are dependent on wetlands. Forty-three percent of species listed as threatened or endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act rely directly or indirectly on wetlands for their survival. Wetlands are particularly important to birds and mammals when they are breeding or migrating. The wetlands that will be drained by the Yazoo Pumps help support the migration of 20 percent of the nation’s duck populations. The wetlands that will be drained are also home to breeding Louisiana Black Bears, which are listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act. Researchers have found that in the spring and summer, bears spend 60 percent of their time in forested wetlands and the remainder of their time moving between wetland areas (Newton 1988).

• Improve water quality and reduce problems caused by excess nutrient loadings. Wetlands help improve water quality by removing and retaining inorganic nutrients, processing organic wastes, and reducing suspended sediments from surface runoff before the runoff reaches open water. For example, wetlands have a tremendous capacity to retain
or process excess nitrogen and phosphorus, which helps to reduce environmental problems that are associated with these excess nutrients, including dead zones, fish kills, and algal blooms. Riparian and forested wetlands are particularly effective at trapping pollutants and
nonpoint source runoff before they reach streams, rivers, bayous, and lakes (Tiner 2005; Gilliam 1994; Brinson 1993; Walbridge 1993). In recognition of this important value, scientists have recommended substantial wetlands restoration to help reduce the size of the enormous hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico.

• Reduce flood damages. By acting as natural sponges and reservoirs, wetlands soak up, store, and then slowly release rain, storm water, snowmelt, groundwater, and flood waters. This process both slows the water’s momentum, reduces its erosive potential, and reduces flood heights. A single acre of wetland can store 1 to 1.5 million gallons of floodwater (EPA 2001). By contrast, when upstream wetlands and streams are destroyed, streams throughout the aquatic system experience increased flooding due to the loss of water retention upstream (Meyer 2003).

• Replenish groundwater and help maintain stream flow during dry periods. Mineral soils found at the edges of many wetlands allow surface water to infiltrate into the ground, helping to recharge groundwater (Verry and Timmons 1982). Ground water recharge through wetlands can contribute significantly to recharge of regional water resources,
particularly in large floodplain areas with long retention times, and in areas where wetlands have a high perimeter to volume ratio (Weller 1981; O’Brien 1988; Hook et al. 1988; Brown and Sullivan 1988; Taylor et al. 1990; Gosselink et al. 1990; Ewel 1990; Reilly et al. 1991; Brinson 1993; Demissie and Khan 1993). A forested wetland overlaying permeable soil can echarge 100,000 gallons of water per acre per day (Anderson and Rockel 1991), and other wetlands recharge groundwater at a rate of up to 20% of wetland volume per season (Weller 1981). This is particularly important in the Yazoo Pumps project area where rivers, streams, and bayous are experiencing significant low flow levels during the summer months.

• Store carbon which is important for moderating global climate change. Many wetlands can store carbon within their plant communities and soil instead of releasing it to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. This storage can help moderate global climate conditions. Draining, filling, and clearing of wetlands, on the other hand, release carbon dioxide into the
atmosphere. “[F]orested wetlands are unparalleled in their capability to take up the carbon-rich gases that are the primary cause of global warming, sequestering significant quantities of elemental carbon while replenishing the atmosphere with oxygen” (FWCA Report 2006).

While effective mitigation for wetland losses at this scale might theoretically be possible, in our experience effective mitigation is not possible under the typical approach to mitigation carried out by the Corps for its civil works projects. We understand that the “mitigation” plan for the Yazoo Pumps consists of the purchase of conservation easements (or possibly the fee title purchase) on far less than one acre of land for each acre of wetland drained, with no requirement to implement hydrological modifications or to otherwise ensure that the purchased lands are in fact wetlands (FWCA Report 2006). As a result, even if this plan were fully implemented, it could not replace the wetland acreage or functions lost to the Yazoo Pumps.

Even with the most advanced mitigation plan and unlimited resources to implement and monitor that plan, we believe that the Yazoo Pumps project would prevent the Administration from meeting its goal of no net loss of the nation’s wetlands. It would also prevent the Corps from
meeting its statutorily mandated “interim goal of no overall net loss of the Nation’s remaining wetlands base, as defined by acreage and function” and the agency’s “long-term goal to increase the quality and quantity of the Nation’s wetlands, as defined by acreage and function” (33 U.S.C. § 2317(a)).

Ecosystems have a threshold character that can preclude predictable analyses of cause and effect. At a certain point, continued assaults or alterations will push the system to what has popularly become known as a “tipping point” which can result in sudden, exponential, or
irreversible change (Gladwell 2002). In such circumstances, even a small amount of additional disturbance could lead to catastrophic consequences (Millenium Assessment 2005; Rappaport 1985). Whether the Yazoo Pumps project area is reaching a tipping point is open to debate, but it is clear that the resources in the area are too important to risk finding out.

The Environmental Protection Agency has the authority—and responsibility—under the Clean Water Act to prohibit the unacceptable adverse impacts of the Yazoo Pumps. The Department of the Interior has the authority—and responsibility—to formally refer the Yazoo Pumps to the Council on Environmental Quality. We urge each of you to use all the authorities at your disposal to protect the wetlands in the Yazoo Pumps project area and the fish and wildlife that depend on them by putting a stop to the Yazoo Pumps project.

Sincerely,
541 wetland and aquatic scientists and professionals, including 144 Ph.D.’s, from 46 states, the District of Columbia, and seven foreign countries.

[rjohnson]

See the General Discussion topic. No ones likes this flood control plan!!!

[Po Monkey Lounger]

I'm agin the pump and have always been agin the pump. And I've publicly said so here before many, many times.

MOREOVER, I've been on record here as against the ongoing Corp. dredging projects within the Yazoo River Basin over the last several years. It makes little to no sense from a cost/benefit standpoint, and is very harmful to our wetlands vital to wildlife and man. The remediation plans by the Corps are a joke, as the Corp does not have to perform the remediation (they will always claim lack of funding for remediation). The Corp just jumps from one wasteful, boondoogle, destructive project to the next, doing little, if any, of the proposed remediation asserted to get the project cleared by the EPA.

rj, I think Hammer just wants to argue for arguments sake. With few, if any, folks ever expressing support for these Corp projects on this board, it appears he has resorted to creating a "straw man" to argue with. So, he may just win this debate.

[GordonGekko]

Hammer, our GW differences aside, I am behind stopping this 100%.... I would like to see how DU and other groups weigh in on this.... I may look into this next week.... I think we are doing more damage than good monkeying with floodplains and I think it needs to stop.... just my unscientific opinion....

[mudsucker]

I do not want the pumps either. Hammer, How does it feel to have people agree with you? No one to argue with!

[Wildfowler]

Hammer, does anyone here really want the pumps?

You'll get no argument from me.

[Hammer]

So far- and I say this with the caveat that there are many, many MSDers we have not heard from- I am very pleasantly surprised at yalls responses on Yazoo Pumps.

Let me assure yall, that it is way worse than most of you know unless you have stayed very close to what the VD is up to and who pulls their strings. They are not sticking to the plan on the Upper Yazoo Dredging, they are digging dirt for the Mainline Levee Enlargement & Maintenance from the very forested wetlands (on the inside of the levee) that protect the levee instead of gettign the dirt from open land on the protected side where they could make some nice fishing/irrigation lakes in the process. And they ahve built the levee system on not 1 but 2 active earthquake faults. The New Madrid Fault runs north and south while the White River Fault runs east and west. The problem is two fold. Obviously, building a levee system on an earthquake fault without any plan in place is not good policy but things are that much worse since so much land has been cleared on both sides of the levee. Unlike in 1927 when the levee last broke, there arent many forested acres now to protect the levee on the River side or slow the flood down on the protected side when the levee breaks again, which is inevitable. Second problem is that by channeling the water between the levees, the Corps has focused downward pressure in a very specific area which increases the likelihood of an earthquake during high water. That would be catastrophic. Problems with Pumps are many but Yazoo Backwater Area currently serves as outlet for floodwater that would otherwise be between levees. That increases likelihood of levee break south of Pumps as well as likelihood that Ol River Control Structure will blow out.

PML- I am not arguing just to argue. I did not know prior declarations against Corps projects from you and others and had yall figured as Pumps supporters. Thanks for straightening me out on that. I assure that irregardless of GW, I am very interested in working with anybody and everybody that is willing to fight the Pumps.

[RockBottom]

i wished DU would step in and try to stop this, this what they are here for, have any chairman or local chapter leaders stepped in yet? just wondering.

[mudsucker]

Look online at the story in todays clarion liar. There is a comment period and a meeting (i think) on this matter!

[Hammer]

Comment period ends January 22, 2008. Public meeting was couple of weeks ago in Mayersville unless a second meeting has been added as it should be given downstream impacts in Vicksburg, Baton Rouge and New Orleans as well as Gulf Dead Zone. If anyone hears about a second public meeting, please let me know.

Send letters of opposition to:

Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Ariel Rios Building (Mail Code: 1101A)
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W.
Washington, D.C. 20460

Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary
U.S. Department of the Interior
1849 C Street, N.W.
Washington D.C. 20240

Either one of these guys can kill this project with a simple letter saying "NO DICE". Then we can get on about the business of building ring levees around communities, raising and relocating structures, reforesting and re-engineering the flood regime in the South Delta. The Corps original plan was that the South Delta should serve as a "SUMP" for floodwater. The brilliant MS River Engineer James Eads called such a sump area as an OUTLET". Said "SUMPS" or "OUTLETS" are critical in relieving pressure on the Mainline Levee system in the MS Delta and downstream.

[cwink]

No pumps..No Pumps..

[MSDawg870]

This would be the Corp's biggest screw up since they built The Levee.

[pntailhntr]

OK, I heard about this on the news last night and don't know alot about it. From what I've read, My vote would be the same answer as the great Kenneth Stokes on the police Chief...HELL NO!!

Clue me in on what it is doing other than killing wetlands. Where will it actually pull water from, where will the pumps be located if in fact it is an actual "pump". If Hammer answers all this, which I'm sure he will, use some Laymans terminology, you need to get down on my level sometimes when it comes to Hammer Passionate subjects!!!

[tobydawg]

....AND YOUR COMPLETE LACK OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE OR TRAINING....

Hammer, how do you know that everyone on here is uneducated, and just what kind of "SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE AND TRAINING" do you possess? Not implying that you don't, Just curious if you do as you seem to be implying that no one else does.

I'm not disagreeing with yours or anyone else's position on the pump issue, which by the way doesn't sound like a good idea from what little I've read on the matter.

[duckduckgoose]

i don't know much about the pumps, but is sounds like a bad idea to me. the wetlands where ever they maybe and the marsh areas along the coast do not need to be messed with.