Rivergate development offers so much opportunity for industry, as planned now. It means more development than would be encouraged if the slough were opened to navigation. You have to look at the total picture. George M. Baldwin, General Manager, Port of Portland, 1969
Although Congress authorized the Corps of Engineers in 1950 to improve navigation in the Columbia Slough by deepening the channel to ten feet and widening it to 100 feet, the navigation project never took place. Congressional appropriations weren’t forthcoming and no local sponsors assumed financial responsibility. By the 1960s, the Port of Portland targeted the Slough as a prime location for developing a massive industrial complex. The Port of Portland applied to the Corps of Engineers to develop the Rivergate Industrial Complex by closing the Columbia Slough to navigation, strengthening dikes and levies along Marine Drive, and filling in thousands of acres of wetlands. At the same time, Herbert Malarkey of Malarkey Roofing applied to build a dock on the slough. Due to the conflicting proposed uses, the Corps suspended both applications until the parties could reach agreement.
After various land acquisitions, including the Leadbetter Estate, which was controlled by Willamette University, the port commissioned a land use study from Daniel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall (called DimJim). The study’s purpose was to come up with a development plan for the port’s 2,932 acres, and adjacent private and public lands. According to the League of Women Voters, which opposed the port, this plan was “called a joint effort of the Port, the City, and the County, [but] in reality the Port paid the bill and the City and County provided limited manpower.”
In 1969, Congress authorized the Slough’s closure, and the Port of Portland prepared to reshape it. The port contended that trash and debris cluttering the waterway made navigating the slough impossible, as did the two to fifteen feet of manure from slaughterhouses covering the slough’s bottom. Property owners disagreed, claiming the slough was as clean as the Willamette River and that small boats used the slough regularly. Private property and business owners, including Herbert Malarkey, Jim Bigelow, the Oregonian’s Marine editor Larry Barber, and others, organized the Columbia Slough Development Corporation (CSDC) to protest the port’s plans. Many environmental and recreation groups soon joined the CSDC in opposition to Columbia Slough closure, and by the early 1970s a flurry of conflicting perspectives added to confusion over what to do with the Columbia Slough.
- Senate Joint Resolution II, Authorizes the Columbia Slough Closure, 1969
- Letter from Shaver Transportation Company to the Corps of Engineers, June 22, 1968
- Letter to the Editor of the Press from Arthur A. Israelson, against the Columbia Slough Development Corporation
- Oregonian article – “Cruise discovers ‘lost’ canal,” May 9, 1971 and response by Leo White of the Multnomah Drainage District
Next Page: From Plug to Plug: The Columbia Slough Environmental Improvement Task Force