10:15 a.m. - WASHINGTON - In a victory for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear challenges to a lower court ruling that favors the navigation industry over recreation and other interests on the Missouri River.

The action, which involves several cases, let stand without comment a ruling last August by the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

That decision said recreation and environmental concerns along the river are of lesser value than maintaining barge traffic along the river's shipping channel.

Monday's action is a blow to North Dakota, South Dakota and environmental groups that appealed the ruling.

The states wanted a higher priority given to the multimillion dollar fishing business upstream, which has suffered from a loss of water directed downstream.

Conservation groups argued that the corps should reduce the amount of water released for navigation over the summer to help protect endangered fish and birds.

"We've apparently struck a reasonable middle ground and will continue to try to meet the needs of all the authorized purposes," said Paul Johnston, a spokesman for the corps' northwestern division office in Omaha, Neb.

The corps for years has fought challenges to its authority to manage the nation's longest river. The Supreme Court action also comes just a week before the corps is expected to move forward with controversial plans for an artificial "spring rise" on the river.

Johnston said Monday that water levels in reservoirs that feed the river likely will remain high enough for a release to take place after May 1. The release is timed to encourage spawning by the pallid sturgeon, a fish on the endangered species list.

North Dakota Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem said he is disappointed in the court's decision.

"What we now have is a contorted view that for some reason the meager and puny navigation industry is entitled to priority over much more robust uses," he said.

Stenehjem said the decision leaves the states with few options because Congress is unlikely to intervene in their favor.

"The only other thing we can do is pray for more rain and snowfall in the winter months," he said.

Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon called the outcome "good news" for Missouri, saying it reaffirms the understanding that all decisions about the river must be made with flood control and navigation in mind.

Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., agreed and said the key is "to ensure that federal river managers enforce that law as confirmed by the courts."

The Missouri River begins in Montana and runs through or alongside North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas and Missouri before emptying into the Mississippi River.

Congress passed the Flood Control Act in 1944, authorizing the construction of a dam and reservoir system on the upper river to control spring flooding.

The Dakotas and Montana have been pushing the corps to store more water in the reservoirs, while downstream states resist the idea. They rely on the water to maintain Missouri River barge shipping and satisfy other needs, including water supplies to some cities.

Last month, the court refused to hear North Dakota's arguments that the corps violated state water pollution laws in managing the Missouri River's water flows.

While the corps will not make a final decision on the spring rise until May 1, Johnston said that as of Monday, the six upper reservoirs feeding the main stem of the river have 37.6 million acre feet of water. That is more than a million acre feet above the minimum set by the corps earlier this year, when officials announced final plans for the spring rise.

"I don't see any way that we would get below the 36.5 restriction" by May 1, Johnston said.

Lawmakers in Montana and the Dakotas worry the release might not leave enough water for boating and fishing interests upstream. Missouri officials vehemently oppose the plan, saying it could flood farmland along the river and harm the barge industry.

Environmental groups generally support the plan as the best way to protect river wildlife.

Johnston said the corps is doing its best to balance the needs of all interests along the river and will cut back or cancel the spring pulse if there is a risk of downstream flooding.

As of Monday, monitoring stations in Omaha, Nebraska City, and Kansas City, Mo., all were well below flood stage, and Johnston said it is "unlikely" that levels would reach a danger point in the next few days.

Johnston said the agency has deliberately stored extra water above the Fort Randall and Gavins Point dams in South Dakota in anticipation of the May pulse. He said the corps would not remove water from Lake Oahe in South Dakota.

A first pulse was supposed to take place on the river earlier this year but was called off because water levels in reservoirs that feed the river were too low.

---

ND attorney general disappointed in court's inaction

North Dakota Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem says he is disappointed that the U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal about Missouri River management.

"The Missouri River is one of the country's greatest resources and isn't being managed as Congress directed," Stenehjem said Monday. "The Court really should have reviewed the corps' operations."

The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in August said recreation and other water uses on the Missouri's upstream reservoirs are of lesser value than maintaining navigation traffic along the river's downstream shipping channel.

North Dakota and South Dakota appealed - but the Supreme Court on Monday refused to take the case.

"I believe the 8th Circuit misinterpreted the Flood Control Act (of 1944), and navigation is not entitled to priority over recreation and other interests," Stenehjem said. "I maintain the Flood Control Act requires the corps to equitably balance all uses.

"In light of the overwhelming economic value of recreation on the Missouri River to upstream states, the Supreme Court should have taken this case," he said.