Marcy Kaptur: “The King amendment would provide no funds to be used for shallow water habitat construction if that involves sediment or…”

“The King amendment would provide no funds to be used for shallow water habitat construction if that involves sediment or soil dumping into the Missouri River. In order to meet the obligations established within the 2003 amended biological opinion, the construction of shallow water habitat is an integral part of compliance. There are two ways to build shallow water habitats: either through flow actions or through mechanical actions. The Corps has been implementing habitat construction to avoid manipulating flows mainly because of concerns expressed by the State of Missouri. This amendment would prevent the construction of shallow water habitat, leaving the pallid sturgeon fish unprotected. I understand that farmers in Iowa have concerns that the Army Corps is not creating these habitats in an ecological manner, but the Army Corps studies show there will only be minimal increases in nutrients carried by the river during project construction. If the Corps cannot put sediment into the Missouri River, it will have to dispose of the sediment in upland areas. There will be increased cost for each construction project. Disposal in upland areas would increase costs by requiring material to be placed in trucks and hauled offsite to upland disposal areas, or adjacent to the habitat projects. Project cost would be increased by 300 percent to 500 percent, depending on site specifics.…”