| The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 478 because it would exempt all flood 
control projects from "consultation" and "takings" requirements of the 
Endangered Species Act (ESA).  The Administration clearly supports minimizing 
flood damages and protecting the residents living in flood prone areas, but 
does not believe that H.R. 478 will achieve these goals.  Because of the severe 
economic and environmental impacts that would be caused by H.R. 478, the 
Secretary of the Interior would recommend that the President veto the bill in 
its current form. 
H.R. 478 would waive ESA requirements in a broad range of non-emergency 
situations, including routine operation and maintenance of flood control 
projects.  For example,  the broad ESA exemption under H.R. 478 could apply to 
prominent dams such as Hoover and Grand Coulee or any hydropower facility with 
associated flood control benefits.  H.R. 478 could have potentially disastrous 
environmental consequences with little project benefits.
 
The administration of ESA by the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the 
National Marine Fisheries Service has not resulted in significant delays in 
construction or proper maintenance of flood control facilities.  Effective 
emergency procedures are already utilized to deal with the ESA and other 
environmental requirements during flood emergencies.  For example, during the 
recent California flooding, FWS implemented ESA provisions which allowed 
emergency actions in disaster areas to be taken quickly without the Act's 
normal "prior consultation" requirements.
 
Under H.R. 478,  virtually all Federal and non-Federal projects in the Columbia 
River basin would arguably be exempt from ESA requirements.  Since these 
projects would no longer be required to protect endangered fish stocks, such as 
Pacific salmon, other public agencies and the private sector would have to 
significantly increase their conservation efforts to compensate for the 
expected loss of important fishery resources.  This could have severe, 
long-term economic impacts for the logging, mining, irrigation, navigation, 
water supply, recreation, and commercial fishing industries in the region.  
These developments could be repeated in other regions of the country.  
 
 |