Upper Mississippi River Basin

The Northeast-Midwest Institute launched the Upper Mississippi River Basin Program in 1995 to advance basin-wide sustainable development goals. The mission of the program is to promote policies that advance restoration of the Upper Mississippi River and its watershed through education of policy makers in Washington and the region. The Institute analyzes and distributes information on Upper Mississippi River management issues, and tracks related appropriations and legislation.

The Upper Mississippi River is a defining feature of the Midwest both environmentally and economically. With a watershed spanning almost half of the United States, the Mississippi is a multiple-use river where commercial navigation, water supply, and recreational demands must be managed to protect the region’s diverse and valuable environmental assets. Protecting the river and its tributaries is vital to the overall heath of the communities in the region, where 30 million residents rely on the Mississippi for drinking water.

The Institute works closely with the Upper Mississippi River Basin Task Force, which was formed in 1998 to disseminate information and coordinate legislative efforts on areas of agreement for the benefit of the Upper Mississippi River.

The Institute’s Upper Mississippi River Basin program has a strong focus on environmental restoration. Authorized by the 1986 Water Resources Development Act, the Upper Mississippi Environmental Management Program (EMP) has been a national model for interstate management of the river with a habitat restoration and a water quality monitoring component. Since the 2007 Water Resources Development Act authorized the Navigation and Ecosystem Sustainability Program (NESP), a dual-purpose authority focusing on both environmental restoration and navigation improvements, the Institute has worked with a broad coalition of organizations to ensure an informed transition from the EMP to the larger authorization under NESP.

As the northern Gulf of Mexico continues to be crippled by hypoxic conditions during the summer, addressing pollutants entering waters from Upper Basin land uses has never been more critical. Although the Upper Mississippi River Basin’s agricultural exports provide important food sources to the country, fertilizer, pesticide, and manure runoff from farm operations degrades water quality, impairing rivers and streams and threatening groundwater supplies. The Institute works with water quality groups from the Mississippi River corridor states as well as other national nonprofits to address this issue on a state and watershed level.

Fiscal 2009 Appropriations for Selected Programs

Program Final FY08* President's Request FY09 House Senate Final FY 09
Environmental Protection Agency
Chesapeake Bay Program- base $20.672m $21.001m
Chesapeake Bay Small Watersehd Grants Program $1.969m 0
Targeted Watershd Program/ Non-point reductions the Bay Watershed $7.875m $8m
Clean Water SRF $689.08m $555m
Section 106 grants- includes money for River Basin Commissions $218.2m $221.7m
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Chesapeake Bay Multi-Species Management $0.352m $0.495m
Chesapeake Bay Studies- CB office base budget $1.92m $2.026m
Chesapeake Bay Oyster Restoration $1.786m (MD) $0.842m
CBIBS/ John Smith Interpretive Buoys $0.446m 0
Bay Watersehd Ed and Training BWET $7.3m (national) 0
Striped Bass/ Bluefish Menhaden Monitoring and Assessment > 0
Chesapeake Bay Trawl Survey $0.44m 0
Susquehanna River Flood Forecasting $1.78m 0
Bue Crab Research 0 0
US Geological Survey
Chesapeake Bay Studies- Priority Ecosystem Science $1.3m $1.3m
Chesapeake Bay Studies- Geographic Analysis and Monitoring $0.4m 0
Chesapeake Bay Studies- Fisheries $0.4m $0.4m
Chesapeake Bay Studies- Other USGS programs $1.2m $1.2m
US Forest Service
Chesapeake Bay Frestry Stewardship $0.935m 0
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Controlling Non-Natvie Species and AssesingEmerging Contaminants > 0
National Fish Habitat Initiative/ Chesapeake Bay Priority Area Fish Passages > 0
Land Acquisition Blackwater Wildlife Refuge $0.394m 0
Army Corps of Engineers
Chesapeake Bay Native Oyster Restoration, Virginia and Maryland $1.968m 0
Sav Restoration R&D ^^ 0
Chesapeake Bay Shoreline Erosion- MD Coastal Management $0.246m 0
Chesapeake Bay Shoreline Erosion- Sediment Model 0 0
Elizabeth River Restoration $0.098m 0
Dorchester/ Blackwater Watlands Restoration/ MD Marshlands $0.197m 0
Anacostia River Plan $0.5m 0
Mid-Bay Islands Study $0.405m 0
Chesapeake Bay Environmental Restoration, MD 10 $1.999m 0
Chesapeake Bay Improvements MD, VA and DC New inWRDA 2007 0
US Deptment of Agriculture
Agricultural Management Assistance $7m 0
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Support for Chesapeake Bay Activities on Farms $4.198m 0
National Park Service
Chesapeake Bay Gateways Program $1.67m 0
Department of Education
Chesapeake Bay Foundation Education $0.407m 0
District of Columbia
DC WASA Long Term Control Plan CSO $8m $14m

There were various rescissions taken at a sub-committee level in the FY08 Omnibus Appropriations bill. These rescissions are reflected in the table above. These rescissions included, 1.56% cut to all activities in the Interior bill (EPA, USGS, USFWS), 1.6% cut to congressionally directed projects and activities in the Energy and Water Bill (COE), 0% cut to the Commerce, Justice, Science bill (NOAA), 0.7% cut to the Agriculture bill and 1.747% cut to section 528 of the Labor/HHS bill (DOE). Of the funds provided to the Bay Program (Bay Program base, small and targeted watershed grants) and the Administrator of the EPA, $5 million in administrative funds shall not be available until 60 days after the EPA Administrator submits a report to the Senate and House Appropriations Committees and to the Comptroller General stating that EPA has implemented the recommendations contained in the Government Accountability Office (GAO) report from October 2005.

** The USGS Chesapeake Bay Studies Program is a combination of funds across several different USGS program areas.

^Note: This figure is not an additive allocation, it is included in funds already appropriated to NRCS

^^Note: Although no dollar amount is specified in the bill, the overall R&D budget for the Army Corps is increased and the report language indicates that the SAV program should be continued.

> Although these programs did not receive direct funding, it is possible that they will receive funding through other agency funds.

 

Contact Information

Mark Gorman
mgorman@nemw.org
202.464.4021

Funders

  • The McKnight Foundation

Products

Links

Events

<<  June 2010  >>
 Su  Mo  Tu  We  Th  Fr  Sa 
    1  2  3  4  5
  6  7  8  9101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930   

No current events.

View All

Latest News