It Took Many Hands To Create Levee Woes There Were Corps Rules, Then A Tree Fight, Then Eagles In Trees, Then …

How did it get to be spring flood season without critical repairs being made in the St. Maries levees?

To begin with, the cottonwood trees whose removal stalled the project would never have existed if the drainage districts had followed Army Corps of Engineers rules.

Despite the arguments of those who insist vegetation prevents erosion, the Corps contends big trees can topple during floods and rip out levees. It can withhold flood assistance if the rule isn’t followed.

But maintenance costs, and local sentiment in favor of the trees, won out.

The trees grew big. That was especially true in the Meadowhurst district.

If there had been no trees, there would have been no eagles perching in them.

If there were no eagles, there would be no reason to invoke the Endangered Species Act.

If the act had been invoked before February, when tree-cutting began, the arguments about what should be done to protect the eagles could have taken place long before flood season.

Instead, this is what happened.

The Panhandle Area Council, which was handling the levee improvement grant for the Economic Development Administration (EDA), asked last September which environmental rules the project must follow.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service responded by listing those laws. It mentioned that bald eagles were present in the area. The letter mentioned that it would be “prudent” to do a biological assessment of the project’s impact on the threatened species.

If that assessment showed potential harm to the species, the letter said, the EDA would have to consult with Fish and Wildlife under terms of the Endangered Species Act.

There was no official biological assessment.

However, a Corps of Engineers “evaluation and plan for improvement” of the levees did conclude that the eagles would be affected.

EDA has little experience dealing with this kind of environmental issue. In November, its regional director concluded that there would be no significant environmental impact from the levee project.

Director Leonard Smith noted that no negative comments were received from state or federal wildlife officials. The law, however, requires that the “action agency” - in this case, EDA investigate and show that a project won’t hurt a listed species.

Fish and Wildlife officials didn’t see Smith’s letter, according to biologist Rick Donaldson. They didn’t know that EDA did not plan to consult with them.

“I guess they decided not to be prudent,” said Donaldson. “The next thing we heard was that they were cutting down trees, and eagles were flying out of them.”

At that point, Fish and Wildlife issued a stop-work order to protect the eagles.

Fish and Wildlife later said that EDA would have to buy land or easements to create 35 acres of habitat along six miles of river. EDA officials said no way, that’s too expensive.

Both agencies have repeatedly said they are willing to cooperate so that the levee repairs can be completed.

Last week, Fish and Wildlife regional director Philip Laumeyer suggested a compromise and more discussion to resolve the standoff.

, DataTimes ILLUSTRATION: 2 color photos