U.S. river designations up in air

After several months of unexplained delay, President Clinton has quietly issued an executive order establishing a 12-member American Heritage Rivers Inititiative Advisory Committee to 20 rivers from a list of 160 nominated for “federal protection.”

The president plans to designate 10 as American Heritage Rivers. The names of the nominated rivers were announced in January. The list includes not only single rivers but
entire watersheds and river systems.

The executive order was issued without fanfare, in contrast to the Sept. 11, 1997, executive order which formally established the program and opened the nominating process for heritage river designation. That order was announced by the president at a press conference. It was promptly placed on the White House website.

No spokesperson was even available to answer questions from the media about last week’s order.

The initiative, which could bring massive federal land use controls onto non-federal lands, has been in the works for over a year. Clinton announced the ambitious program during last year’s State of the Union Address.

“I will designate 10 American Heritage Rivers to help communities along side them revitalize their waterfronts and clean up pollution in the rivers,” he said.

The chosen rivers would receive federal support in the form of increased services, grants and greater access to federal programs. Some 13 federal departments and agencies would be involved in the inititiative’s implementation, including the departments of Agriculture, EPA, Interior — even Defense and Justice. Each river would be assigned a “czar” dubbed a “river navigator” to “help implement the community’s vision and provide a single contact/liaison for all federal resources.” The President’s Council on Environmental Quality, chaired by presidential appointee Katie McGinty, would administer the programs from Washington.

According to the executive order each member of the advisory committee is “well qualified,” through “training, experience, and attainments … to appraise the quality of nominations for selection of rivers as American Heritage Rivers submitted by communities across the country.”

However, with a couple of exceptions, the appointees come from managerial fields or political office. Only two have a solid background in science. None have any background in constitutional law — or, for that matter, a law degree. None have expertise in land rights issues or a knowledge of real estate appraising and assessing.

Dayton Duncan, chairman of the committee, is an author and writer/producer of documentary films. Other members are Gerald E. Galloway Jr., William L. Graf, Anthony P. Grassi, Debbie Jaramillo, Charles R. Jordan, Daniel Kemmis, David Olsen, Yolanda Rivera, Donald G. Sampson, Maria F. Teran and P. Kay Whitlock.

Katie McGinty says “the benefits of focused federal support” for locally generated river action plans is “highly coveted” by applicants. Perhaps. But for a program supposedly benign, it has generated a firestorm of opposition from landowners, local government officials and others who foresee controls being placed on property use and restrictions on the enjoyment of the rivers. McGinty has therefore promised that designation is “100 percent at the option of communities.”

Further, a “member of Congress is afforded in this program a veto right in terms of the existence or the participation of this program,” said McGinty at a congressional hearing.

Taking McGinty at her word, nearly 200 individuals, organizations, agencies and boards of locally elected officials have demanded that the river or rivers in their jurisdications be “denominated” from the official list of nominees. For example, the state Senate of
Kentucky unanimously approved a resolution urging Congress to oppose the initiative and the inclusion of any territory within Kentucky. The resolution sets out the key points of opposition, in particular that:

“the AHRI was implemented by an executive order of the President of the United States, neither the legislature of the Commonwealth of Kentucky nor the Congress of the United States has considered, debated, or approved such designations.

“no body of elected officials, whether local, state, or federal, has input, recourse, or veto power over such land use management politicies that may be prescribed by the AHRI or its ‘River Navigators'”

“the use of land in AHRI designated areas for ordinary commercial or agriculture purposes may be severely restricted or eliminated.”

Kentucky does not want portions of its land area “controlled by a branch of the EPA which has a history of aggressive and unconstitutional regulation.”

Various members of Congress have opted to exercise their “veto right” over designation. This includes the entire Idaho delegation and several representatives from Texas, including Ron Paul, Dick Armey, and Bill Archer and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R).

A fracas erupted in North Carolina when Republican Rep. Charles Taylor discovered that the French Broad River had been nominated — over his objections — by a group called RiverLink. RiverLink had not only nominated the river but set up a debate for February 28 between one Westley Warren of the staff of the Council on Environmental Quality and Rep. Taylor. A press release from RiverLink said that Warren would “answer (Taylor’s) concerns” about the designation. There was just one problem. Nobody had told the congressman about the pending debate. He learned of it just days before it was due to take place.

“I have always thought it was a matter of courtesy for administration officials to notify a member of Congress when a visit to their district would occur,” Taylor wrote in a blistering letter to Katie McGinty. “Considering on a number of occasions I have transmitted my opposition and the reasons for it to the President, the Secretary of Interior, and you … it is insulting that your staff would have to communicate with
me about my ‘concerns’ through a third party,” he said.

But what particularly goaded Taylor was the fact that despite his opposition, which did result in termination of the designation, the Council on Environmental Quality continued to try and drum up public support for it.

“This amounts to a taxpayer subsidy for a lobbying campaign to secure a change in my position,” Taylor wrote. As he saw it, that could well be a violation of federal law.

In addition to strong congressional opposition from certain representatives, most of the formal statements for opting out are by county boards of supervisors/commissioners. To date, in response to citizen protests against designation, some 107 county boards have passed formal resolutions demanding that the initiative’s jurisdiction not be superimposed on the stretch of nominated river in their counties. These include 22 of Oregon’s 36 counties, 24 Missouri counties and the Montana Association of Counties.

The advisory committee is planning to meet in May, and its recommendations are expected to be acted upon promptly by the president.