[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 125 (Monday, September 30, 2002)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1709]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  CONGRESS MUST NOT UPSET THE DELICATE ECOLOGICAL BALANCE OF THE ST. 
                             LAWRENCE RIVER

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. JOHN M. McHUGH

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                       Monday, September 30, 2002

  Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, for all the aspects of natural beauty that 
grace the North Country, few equal the splendor of the St. Lawrence 
River. From the wide expanse of its Gulf to the grandeur of the 
Thousand Islands, the St. Lawrence River is truly a wonder to behold.
  For those of us who call this special region home, the St. Lawrence 
has long been a vital source of commercial and recreational activity. 
From its waters and its fragile environs, many thousands earn their 
living and renew their lives. Simply put, our welfare in very tangible 
and vital ways is inextricably linked and dependent upon the vitality 
of the St. Lawrence.
  It is, therefore, both understandable and logical that many who know 
this river best have viewed with great skepticism recent initiatives 
that seek to measure the potential impact of conducting a massive 
construction and dredging project designed to significantly expand the 
existing shipping locks and channel depths to accommodate Seaway access 
to a larger class of freight vessels. Their concern has focused on the 
unavoidable scope of such an undertaking and the disruptive effects 
that would result upon a delicately balanced ecosystem that even today 
is severely stressed by existing Seaway traffic.
  As someone who has been granted the honor of representing the entire 
New York State span of the St. Lawrence, I have spent much time in 
recent months considering the views of both those who doubt and those 
who embrace the proposed project. Clearly, the Seaway serves a vital 
purpose both to this region and to others throughout the Great Lakes 
that utilize the shipping it accommodates. Just as evident is the need 
to reformulate this vital system's operations to ensure its highest 
utilization into the future. Indeed, the observation that the proposal 
in question is no more than a study designed to identify the existence 
and scope of any resulting problem is not without merit.
  In the final analysis, however, my foremost responsibility is to 
assume those positions that represent the greater interests of those I 
represent. In my opinion, no matter what merits any study may offer, 
the inescapable fact remains that the perils of such a project, if 
initiated, would far outweigh any benefits that may result to our 
region. The viability of our vital tourism industry, the generation of 
economically stimulating hydropower, and the untold enjoyment that the 
St. Lawrence provides derives less from the shipping that the river 
supports that the delicate environment it nurtures. As past studies 
have invariably found, the effects of a project of the magnitude in 
question would unavoidably and unilaterally upset the delicate 
ecological balance of the St. Lawrence River and all that prospers from 
it.
  Given the great importance of this issue to our region, I feel 
compelled to declare my opposition to the proposed study and the 
requested funding to advance it. I fully recognize the likely reality 
that my views may be shared by few in the House of Representatives. 
While the area I represent affords me the distinction of being the only 
Member from New York to have the St. Lawrence River shores within their 
district, it also means that many others hail from areas that stand to 
realize greater benefits any expansion of the existing systems might 
afford. The fact that both the Energy and Water Development 
Subcommittee and full House Appropriations Committee have provided $2 
million to advance this study attest to the support this initiative has 
gained thus far. Nevertheless, I have no intention of abandoning the 
higher interests of my district because the odds may be long.
  I have begun the preparation of an amendment that will seek to remove 
the $2 million in study funding currently contained in the FY03 House 
Appropriations bill should this legislation be advanced. I will submit 
that amendment to the Rules Committee requesting that it be approved 
for consideration if and when the full bill is brought to the House 
Floor for a vote. In this way, I hope to convey to other Members the 
peril that such an initiative holds and, hopefully, gain the support of 
those who recognize the need to stand on the side of preserving a 
resource that is so critically important to so many.

                          ____________________