LEHIGH RIVER STOCKING ASSOCIATION   &  RAYMOND PROFFITT FOUNDATION

JOINT NEWS RELEASE

ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS SUE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
FOR WATER MISMANAGEMENT DURING DROUGHT

On August 11, 1999, the Lehigh River Stocking Association (LRSA) and the Raymond Proffitt Foundation (RPF) filed a lawsuit in federal court against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers alleging mismanagement of water resources on the Lehigh River. LRSA and RPF are working with other environmental and sporting groups concerned about the Lehigh River. According to Joe Turner of RPF, this is the first shot in our campaign to "take back our river from decades of government mishandling."

The Corps built and operates the F.E. Walter Dam which controls all water in the Upper Lehigh River and is located in Carbon and Luzerne Counties. The dam was originally built for flood control. In 1990, Congress changed the purpose, or mission of all Corps projects to include environmental protection. According to Jim Slinsky of LRSA, "somehow the Corps never caught on that their mission had changed."

The goal of the lawsuit is twofold. First, we want to stop the Corps from dumping huge amounts of water into the Lehigh during the winter and spring, where it causes environmental damage to spawning fish and other aquatic life as well as killing numerous amounts of nesting birds and their young who in the spring locate downstream from the dam's releases.

The second goal is require the Corps to store this water during winter and spring, and then to release it slowly during the summer months. This would provide anywhere from 11 to 27 billion gallons of extra water to the parched Lehigh River. Steady high volume releases would benefit everyone from fisherman to whitewater rafters to canoeists to those people who just enjoy a flowing river. Such releases would also help during drought periods.

"Imagine what 11 to 27 billion gallons would do to the encroaching salt line in the Delaware," said Jim Slinksy. The Lehigh flows into the Delaware high enough to be able to push back any salt intrusion.

The Corps has agreed to store and release this water on previous occasions. "The only catch is that they demanded to be paid for it", said Joe Turner. The money requested is not for simple operation and maintenance, but a whopping $171,000 per year to help pay for the original cost of building the dam, calculated at today's interest rates.

What the Corps does not tell the public, however, is that the dam was already paid for with tax dollars. In addition, the water belongs to the citizens of Pennsylvania, not the Corps.

On August 2, 1999, the Corps agreed, for money, to begin storing water for drought control. The consequence of this action is to reduce the flow that is already going into the Lehigh River. Jim Slinsky had the following comment on this development: "I do not understand why the Corps is reducing the flow in the Lehigh River during a drought? They claim they are doing so to store water for drought control, but we are already in a drought. They are killing the river to save the river. They should have stored water in the early stages of the drought, as we repeatedly asked them to."

For many years environmental groups, federal and state fish and wildlife agencies, and legislators have all asked the Corps to do what it is already required to do by law. The answer was always the same. The Corps would be willing to store and release if a non-federal sponsor would pay the money demanded by the Corps.

The lawsuit asks the court to require the Corps to sit down with the fish and wildlife agencies and a coalition of interested environmental and sporting groups to develop a schedule for the releases that will satisfy everyone. If the court rules that the Corps has an obligation to protect the environment, and that it cannot charge money for doing so---then we hope that the Corps will be a responsible public agency and work with its public.

For further information contact: John Wilmer at (610) 565-2736 or Jim Slinsky at (610) 262-2143.

LEGAL ARGUMENTS

COUNT 1  THE CORPS IS VIOLATING THE WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1990 WHICH REQUIRES THE CORPS TO CONSIDER ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AS ONE OF ITS MISSIONS

COUNT 2  THE CORPS IS REFUSING ITS MISSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION BECAUSE IT IS NOT BEING PAID FOR SUCH A MISSION

COUNT 3  THE PENDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CORPS AND THE DELAWARE RIVER BASIN COMMISSION TO STORE WATER AT WALTER DAM FOR DROUGHT EMERGENCIES SHOULD BE ENJOINED IF IT DOES NOT ALSO PROVIDE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

COUNT 4  IN THE EVENT THAT STORAGE FOR DROUGHT CONTROL CAN BE DONE CONSISTENT WITH THE CORPS' MISSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION THEN THE MONEY THE CORPS IS REQUESTING TO STORE AND RELEASE AT WALTER DAM IS UNREASONABLE, UNCONSCIONABLE, INCORRECTLY CALCULATED, PROHIBITIVE AND RESULTS IN TAXPAYERS PAYING THEIR GOVERNMENT TWICE FOR THE SAME WATER, WHICH SAID TAXPAYERS OWN ANYWAY

COUNT 5  CORPS' RELEASES FROM BELTZVILLE DAM FOR MONEY, INSTEAD OF STORING AND RELEASING FROM WALTER DAM VIOLATE THE CORPS MISSION OF RECREATION FOR BELTZVILLE DAM

COUNT 6  THE CORPS IS VIOLATING THE WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1988 BY NOT ADEQUATELY PROVIDING FOR RECREATION AS ONE OF ITS MISSIONS

COUNT 7  THE CORPS IS VIOLATING THE FISH AND WILDLIFE COORDINATION ACT BY FAILING TO CONSERVE WILDLIFE RESOURCES AND BY FAILING TO PREVENT SUCH LOSS AND DAMAGES

COUNT 8  THE CORPS IS VIOLATING THE FISH AND WILDLIFE COORDINATION ACT BY FAILING TO COORDINATE WATER RELEASES WITH FISH AND WILDLIFE AGENCIES

COUNT 9 THE CORPS IS VIOLATING PENNSYLVANIA WATER QUALITY STANDARDS

COUNT 10  THE CORPS IS VIOLATING THE FEDERAL CLEAN WATER ACT BY VIOLATING PENNSYLVANIA'S WATER QUALITY STANDARDS

COUNT 11  THE CORPS IS VIOLATING PENNSYLVANIA'S CONSTITUTION

COUNT 12  CORPS RELEASES FROM WALTER DAM FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request this Court to hold that the Corps is causing environmental harm to the Lehigh River and its wildlife; is failing to fulfill its missions of environmental protection and recreation; is in violation of several major environmental laws; and it is violating its public duties by only willing to fulfill its missions if it can get paid money. The Plaintiffs further respectfully request that the Corps should be enjoined from releasing water in a manner that violates the Corps mission of environmental protection unless said water exceeds safety elevations for flood control; that the Corps be enjoined from entering into any agreement with DRBC or in taking any action for drought control storage unless said agreement or action also provides for environmental protection and includes input from U.S. Fish & Wildlife, the Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission and a coalition of private environmental groups including Plaintiffs, or in the event that such agreement or action is in effect that it be rescinded; and that the Corps should be required to release water from the Walter Dam during a three month summer period, or any other period that would provide year round environmental protection, and according to a schedule worked out with U.S. Fish & Wildlife , the Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission and a coalition of private environmental groups including Plaintiffs. Finally, the Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court award attorney and expert fees and costs to Plaintiffs; and that this Court award any other relief it may deem appropriate. Respectfully submitted,

JOHN WILMER
Attorney for Plaintiffs
21 Paxon Hollow Road
Media, PA 19063
(610) 565-2736
jwilmer@ix.netcom.com
I.D. # 33119
Date: August 11, 1999

                                                                  LINK TO FULL COMPLAINT

<<<<END>>>>

return