St. Johns Bayou/New Madrid Floodway Project

Corps Retreats on St. Johns/New Madrid Bayou

On July 20, 2005, the Corps announced that it intends to withdraw its decision to move forward on the hugely destructive St. Johns/New Madrid Bayou project. This is a significant— but probably temporary victory in a decade long fight to save one of Missouri’s most special places. The Corps’ retreat stems from multiple legal challenges brought by the Coalition and Environmental Defense during which it was revealed that the agency’s proposed wetland mitigation fell woefully short of meeting the requirements of the Clean Water Act. Instead of facing a loss in court, the Corps chose to withdraw its decision. The agency has announced that it will prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement in which it will recalculate mitigation requirements. Stay tuned!

$85 Million Project Would Harm Wetlands

Some Missouri politicians are pushing an $85 million government handout to a few large landowners, while doing irreparable damage to the few remaining wetlands in the state. What is their justification? Allegedly, to protect a small town from flooding.

Truth be told, the project would mostly benefit a handful of large landowners who grow soybeans, which are already in huge surplus. These politically connected landowners, of course, think it would be a good idea to spend millions of someone else's money to protect their fields from occasional flooding.

The project – dubbed the "St. John's Bayou/New Madrid Floodway Project" – primarily consists of closing off a gap in the Mississippi River frontline levee. Ironically, this gap has remained in the levee to the present time because it helps reduce flooding in more developed areas upstream. Closing the gap would mean that floodwaters could no longer expand into the river's floodplain, which would put more pressure on communities like Cairo, IL in times of dangerous flooding.

The real tragedy is that East Prairie – the small Missouri town said to be saved by the project – would still flood once every 10 years even if the project is built. The flooding will continue to happen because East Prairie is not flooded by the Mississippi River. East Prairie is flooded by St. James Ditch, a small tributary to the Mississippi. The flooding occurs because even modest rainfalls overwhelm its storm drains. A small part of the project would address St. James Ditch, but the bigger storm system problem would not be touched.

Unfortunately, this information is buried in a six-inch thick government document and is curiously not repeated by those who support the plan. So, while upstream communities would be subjected to additional flooding, the town of East Prairie would remain as wet as ever. Nevertheless, the cry to save this small town remains the single biggest political ploy of those who want the project built.

Adding insult to injury is the fact that a workable solution to protect the town of East Prairie from flooding exists, and it could have been built years ago if the region's politicians hadn't tried to shake down the American taxpayer for more government pork.

According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, only $11 million would be needed to put a levee along St. James Ditch and to build a modern storm water system for East Prairie. Funds could also be used to raise the road to Pinhook, another small town in the area. And if it was decided that the region needed yet more assistance, millions would still be left over to fund other economic development projects to attract and retain businesses.

The dangers of St. John's Bayou/New Madrid Floodway Project go beyond this deceptive attempt to enrich large landowners at the taxpayers' expense. It has also galvanized environmental organizations because of the huge toll on fish and wildlife habitats and one of Missouri 's most outstanding state parks. Roughly 80,000 acres of wetlands and floodplains would be damaged or destroyed in an area that has already seen the virtual elimination of its pre-settlement ecosystems.

By closing a gap in the huge earthen levees that line the Mississippi River , the proposed project would eliminate one of the last places the Mississippi River is able to expand each winter into its floodplain. Many of the river's fish only spawn in these floodplains, which also nourish migratory ducks and shorebirds. The flooding also rejuvenates Big Oak Tree State Park, which hosts several of the state's largest trees and relies on seasonal flooding from the Mississippi for its health. This park protects a small remnant of an ecosystem that is but 1 percent of its former size.

To offset the loss of 80,000 acres of wetlands and floodplains, the government would not restore a single wetland but promises to plant 8,000 acres of trees on farmland. No farmers have yet been found to purchase this land from, nor has it been explained how fish will climb over the levee to use these new forests to spawn. Put simply, the project would be an ecological disaster for southeast Missouri.

It's time for Missouri ’s leaders to level with the people of East Prairie and the state. The town will still flood once every 10 years even if this project is built and the region's few remaining wetlands would be destroyed.

There's a better way to save the town, and to save the wetlands.