It was gratifying to note the Indianapolis Star's Oct. 13 features that focused on the 30th anniversary of the Clean Water Act - "State makes strides, but still faces hurdles" and "Some waterways escape pollution." It's clear that without the protections of the 1972 federal Clean Water Act, our Hoosier streams would still be open sewers for industry.

However, pollution from industrial plants and agricultural uses are only part of the problem. Loss of habitat from urban development also contributes. This was aptly referenced in the Star coverage by a DNR biologist who said: "It's just being degraded every day in Indiana. Everybody says, 'Let me develop my 100 feet of (stream) frontage' … But it's the cumulative effect of a lot of small developments that alter the habitat on a large scale."

That's a refreshingly candid acknowledgment by a DNR employee of the adverse impact of development encroachment on our river lands. Most of the time, the DNR's contentious lawyers erect legal stone walls to citizens' groups that attempt to challenge the agency's ineffective, if not also corrupt, implementation of Indiana's 1945 Flood Control Act, which was designed, at least ostensibly, to protect wildlife (and human life and property).

A controversial case in point is the floodway fill application of shopping center developer Centre Properties for land near 96th and Allisonville Road in Indianapolis. This destructive proposal was first challenged in 1997 by three Indianapolis residents and the Hoosier Environmental Council, who sought to reverse the DNR's permit for the project (i.e. to prevent the major environmental degradation resulting from the developer's plan to build another Castleton-area retail center within the jurisdictional floodway of the White River.) The battle has raged for nearly six years.

A deposition by a DNR employee in the current legal proceeding (Hoosier Environmental Council v. the Department of Natural Resources and Centre Properties), and a subsequent DNR-funded consultant study, necessitated by the deposition, have strongly suggested that the DNR "cooked the books" in order to justify the issuance of the floodway-fill permit. It did so by manipulating the computer modeling so that there would be no documented predicted violation of the standard (which is .14 of a foot in increased floodwater elevation).

In reality, and as the recent DNR consultant study has apparently confirmed, there would indeed be violations of the DNR's standard. This is not mere engineering nuance -- many homes upstream of the project would receive significantly more floodwater, and significant adverse impacts on aquatic resources would result.

The HEC lawsuit against the DNR is still pending, and it's premature to predict the outcome. However, this case has shown that Indiana's system for regulating development on river lands can be ineffective, if not ethically suspect.

Our White River in central Indiana has twice been designated by American Rivers in Washington, D.C. as one of North America's most threatened rivers, due, in part, to development encroachment. If we truly want to protect our rivers from such destructive shenanigans, we'll need to give our system of project review a thorough overhaul.

Clarke Kahlo is an Indianapolis resident, Hoosier Environmental Council board member and founder of the group Protect Our Rivers Now.