Max Baucus: “Third, the amendment will have some unintended, and perhaps dangerous, effects. Not all changes to the operation of the…”

“Third, the amendment will have some unintended, and perhaps dangerous, effects. Not all changes to the operation of the Columbia/Snake river system are made for the purpose of protecting fish and wildlife. Often, there are other reasons. Recently, there were concerns about sabotage of the Grand Coulee dam. The water levels were lowered, so that emergency repairs could be made. This reduced power generating capacity, probably worth a few million dollars. Under the rider, the reduction in water levels would have had to be approved by Congress. Another example. In some situations, it may be appropriate to provide more water for irrigation, at the expense of power production. Or vice versa. Or to set more space aside for flood control. Each year, the planning process starts by measuring the snowpack and predicting the runoff. In a particularly wet year, like 1997, operational changes may be needed to prevent downstream flooding, by setting aside more storage space in upstream reservoirs. In a particularly dry year, operational changes may need to be made to allocate scare water among competing uses. In many of these cases, under the rider, the agencies could only act if they received specific Congressional approval. Mr. President, we all know how hard it is to get anything passed around here. Any change that is at all controversial can be at least delayed, and maybe stopped completely.”