Water: A Billion Dollar Battleground

Jimmy Carter is trying to take the pork out of the pork barrel, and Congress wants to leave it in. The basic fight is as simple as that, but the ramifications are enormous, millions of Americans will be affected, the issues are hotly debatable, and the struggle threatens to become the new President's most serious conflict with Capitol Hill.

How the fight goes may have grave repercussions later on for Carter and his programs: the memories of Senators and Congressmen run long, and they can nurse their grudges as bitterly as the Medici. With the possible exception of motherhood, there is nothing more sacred to many members of Congress than the physical evidences of the power that Carter is trying to limit: gigantic dams, huge reservoirs, aqueducts that run for hundreds of miles, all proof--cast in concrete--of the legislators' concern for the folks back home. What is more, there is no sure way of measuring the true value of such projects, many of which have transformed the life--and the landscape--of America. "In the long run," says Washington's Senator Warren Magnuson, "we're going to win this fight." And history is on his side.

Carter did not consult anyone on the Hill or in the states before announcing that he was cutting $289 million--earmarked for 19 water-control projects--out of Gerald Ford's proposed budget for fiscal 1978. Convinced that many projects were unnecessary, he had vowed during the campaign "to get the Corps of Engineers out of the dam-building business." The President personally approved the 19 projects for the endangered species list on the grounds that they were uneconomical by today's standards, unsafe or unsound in terms of their effect on the environment. So far, $1 billion has been spent on the programs; if completed, they would cost $5.1 billion more.

The reaction to Carter's initiative was predictably swift and angry. Governors and Congressmen from the affected areas echoed Senator Scoop Jackson's charge that the move was an absurd mistake. Declared Senate Majority Leader Robert Byrd: "It is a waste of money to stop projects that have already started and gone through the long process of justification."

Carter, however, had left himself an out: he said he would consider supporting any program cleared by an intensive reviewing process that was to produce a report for him by April 15. But he also ordered Government experts to look into all 337 federal water projects and to single out others--still in the budget for 1978--that should be studied further for possible cutting.

Some of the works on Carter's list appear to be more vulnerable than others. The Fruitland Mesa Dam in west-central Colorado, for instance, is designed in part to irrigate 11,940 acres and provide supplemental water for another 6,310 by damming the Gunnison River. The most direct beneficiaries of the $87 million project would be some 60 farms and ranches. In effect, these would be heavily subsidized by the Government, since they are expected to pay back only $3.8 million. (About 84% of the project's total cost would be reimbursed by fees charged for its other benefits, such as the generating of electricity.)

The task of evaluating far larger public works is extremely difficult because of the imprecise factors involved, including assessments of the economic advantages, the benefits of flood control, safety, the damage to the environment and the trouble and cost of dislocating people and communities. Three of the biggest undertakings that Carter has put under close review--and whose construction he firmly opposes:

THE AUBURN-FOLSOM PROJECT. The fight over the $1 billion scheme on California's American River provides a case study in the realities of water politics. Governor Jerry Brown, an ardent environmentalist, had campaigned for office as an opponent of new dams, but the severe drought, which has forced some of his Northern California constituents to haul water by the bucket, has changed Brown's mind. When Carter put Auburn-Folsom on his list, Brown came out in favor of the project, which is designed to irrigate 29,000 acres and provide supplemental water to 387,000 more. Brown's stand in favor of building the Auburn Dam was backed by Lyston Baldwin, past president of the Sacramento Area Water Works Association. Carter's action, he said, "left me shaking. If the dam is stopped, it will shatter the whole master plan for this section of California."

Brown did condition his approval on a finding by non-government experts, due this June, that the Auburn Dam would be safe. The gigantic structure (4,200 ft. wide at its base and 700 ft. high) would be built in an area prone to earthquakes. U.S. Geological Survey scientists say there is a dangerous earthquake fault less than a mile from the proposed site. The Association of Engineering Geologists warned last year that an earthquake could shatter the dam, releasing a reservoir 40 miles long containing 736 billion gallons of water. The terrifying result: a 100 ft. high wall of water that would rupture other dams downstream and all but drown the Sacramento area. At last week's federal hearing on the project, Civil Engineer Harry Cedergren said that the collapse of the Auburn could "kill up to 1 million people, flood 1,000 square miles of developed land, inundate five military installations and cause $40 or $50 billion in property damage."

THE CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT. Congressman Morris Udall, another dedicated conservationist, is urbane enough to acknowledge that one man's "sound water-resource project" is another man's pork barrel. As it happens, one of the Congressman's public works is on Carter's list: the $1.6 billion Central Arizona Project, now about 20% complete, which would draw upon the Colorado River in the western part of the state, pump the water 2,000 ft. uphill and carry it by 400 miles of aqueducts to the outskirts of Phoenix and Tucson.

As chairman of the House Interior Committee, Mo Udall has clout where it counts, and he used it. Last week he joined the contingent of irate Arizona officials, including Governor Raul Castro, who appeared in Washington to press the case for CAP. For 40 years, the state has been battling to tap the Colorado. Without the water, says Udall, with his customary flair, Tucson and Phoenix "are going to dry up and blow away."

Opponents of CAP charge that the Colorado will not be able to supply enough water to make the idea feasible; that the state should make better use of its surface and underground water; that one of the main dams--the Orme--would be built over a geological fault; and that the Yavapai Indians would be forced off their land.

THE GARRISON DIVERSION. Quite a different kind of problem is posed by the $566 million enterprise along the Missouri River in North Dakota. The Garrison, 19% complete, would carry water through 1,000 miles of major canals to irrigate 250,000 acres in the dry eastern part of the state.

At last week's public hearing in Jamestown, N. Dak., the state's officials put as much pressure as they could on the Carter Administration. Governor Arthur Link even succeeded in persuading Interior Secretary Cecil Andrus, an old friend, to come. North Dakota's three-man congressional delegation was there, as were most state officials and nearly the entire state legislature, which made the 100-mile trip from Bismarck to attend. Backing the project, State Representative Michael Unhjem bitterly asked: "I wonder if Georgia ever had a drought during the '30s?"

Opponents of the Garrison say that in order to bring water to its 250,000 acres, the project would disrupt 220,000 acres now being farmed. Runoff water from the irrigated areas would leach salty chemicals from the soil and carry them into the Souris and Red rivers. Richard Madson, a local representative of the Audubon Society, calls the dispute over the Garrison "a classic test of whether the bureaucracy can be slowed down once it's moving."

One man who wants to stop the bureaucracy altogether is Ben Shatz, who is angry at the way the Government acquired 80 acres of his land that lay in the path of a Garrison canal. The Bureau of Reclamation offered $9,000 for the parcel, which Shatz felt was worth $20,000. When he refused the offer, the Government condemned the land, and he had to go to court to get a settlement of $17,000. Shatz has erected a large sign on his property proclaiming: "My Farm Ruined by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation." Says he: "It will stay there until I die. They treated me like a dog."

The Bureau of Reclamation so bitterly opposed by Shatz is an agency of the Department of the Interior. Founded in 1902 to irrigate the barren West, the bureau has spent $7.6 billion to dam, channel, pump and divert almost anything that flows in that vast region. The bureau's proudest monuments: the Hoover Dam on the Colorado River and the Grand Coulee on the Columbia.

The bureau's senior partner in building water-control projects is the Army Corps of Engineers. While also serving as a regular branch of the Army, the engineers have constructed 4,000 projects during the past 152 years. They tamed the Mississippi River, dug the Panama Canal, erected the secret installations that produced the atomic bomb, and along the way earned the wrath of legions of environmentalists.

Sock Us. Both the bureau and the corps were having their problems with the President last week. The Auburn Dam, the Central Arizona Project and the Garrison--all bureau projects--remained under review. Three of the original 19 programs were approved by the White House for funding. However, 14 others were put on what is now called Carter's "hit list," bringing the total under serious re-examination up to 30. One addition was the corps' gargantuan $1.6 billion Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway (see box). Its inclusion on the list with CAP meant that the Administration was trying to stop the two biggest public works projects in U.S. history.

Two of the new programs coming under surveillance are in Colorado, bringing the total jeopardized projects in that state to five--and bringing Colorado Governor Richard Lamm to a boil: "They look for our coal, they look for our oil shale, they look for our uranium--they look to Colorado for their energy. But their opening card is to sock us in the face."

This week the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Public Works will begin what are certain to be spirited hearings on all 30 projects that Carter has said he would not approve unless the reviewing panel endorses them. The Senators and Congressmen could vote to put every project deleted by Carter right back into the budget, a step that would match the mood of a number of leading legislators from the South and West. Byrd, Jackson and 33 other Democratic Senators have already joined 30 Republicans to give Carter his first major defeat on the Hill: a 65-to-24 vote on March 10 passing an amendment requiring the President to spend any money voted by Congress for the water-control programs.

Best Soldiers. If Congress does approve the money for projects opposed by the Administration, Carter faces some difficult choices. He could turn down the package, hoping that the budget cutters on the Hill would sustain his veto. Or he could accept the bill and try to persuade Congress to allow him to rescind funds for certain projects--a questionable possibility. Finally, Carter could take the money, swallow his pride and let the concrete pour.

Any maneuver by Carter to thwart Congress could easily work against him. He soon will be trying to persuade the Hill to accept major pieces of legislation, such as his energy program. Senator Russell Long, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, has urged Carter to compromise on the water projects. "Otherwise," warns Long, "he is going to find himself at war with his own best soldiers."

At his press conference last week, Carter declared: "I personally don't believe any of the projects ought to be built." But he added he would "keep an open mind" as the public hearings went on, and he has been taking a more conciliatory approach to Congress. He has promised to consult with affected legislators in the future before proposing to stop other water programs. The White House is striving to make sure members of Congress are the first to know when a project in their areas is in trouble--or if one has been cleared--rather than having them learn about it from reporters, as had happened before. Last week Carter asked Congress to provide $844 million for drought relief, a move the White House took pains to say was unrelated to the water-projects fight, but which would surely please Western Senators and Congressmen.

Watching Carter operate, and sensing the mood of Congress, House Appropriations Committee Chairman George Mahon is convinced that most of the pork will stay in the barrel. Says he: "The bulk of these dams will be built."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.