Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is the Corps of Engineers forcibly reverting floodplain to its natural state? (Conspiracy?)
wuwt ^ | 6/26/2011 | alec rawls

Posted on 06/26/2011 6:52:05 AM PDT by milwguy

That’s the eye-popping thesis suggested by Joe Herring at American Thinker, and his prima facie evidence, while thin, is also hard to get around. The key fact is this:

On February 3, 2011, a series of e-mails from Ft. Pierre SD Director of Public Works Brad Lawrence sounded the alarm loud and clear. In correspondence to the headquarters of the American Water Works Association in Washington, D.C., Lawrence warned that “the Corps of Engineers has failed thus far to evacuate enough water from the main stem reservoirs to meet normal runoff conditions. This year’s runoff will be anything but normal.”

For the why, Herring quotes the Corps’ Master Water Control Manual:

Releases at higher-than-normal rates early in the season that cannot be supported by runoff forecasting techniques is inconsistent with all System purposes other than flood control. All of the other authorized purposes depend upon the accumulation of water in the System rather than the availability of vacant storage space. [Emphasis added.]

Originally, these other purposes were water supply, river navigation and recreation, none of which are served by failing to leave enough reservoir space for normal runoff in a high runoff year. But through thirty years of environmentalist domination of the federal bureaucracy, additional purposes have gained ever higher priority. The Missouri River should be “natural”:

The Clinton administration threw its support behind the change, officially shifting the priorities of the Missouri River dam system from flood control, facilitation of commercial traffic, and recreation to habitat restoration, wetlands preservation, and culturally sensitive and sustainable biodiversity.

Herring even quotes a Corps biologist celebrating the current flood:

The former function of the river is being restored in this one-year event. In the short term, it could be detrimental, but in the long term it could be very beneficial.”

Sherlock Holmes’ method of exclusion

The direct evidence here is merely suggestive. “Habitat restoration” is a high priority goal and there is a bit of overt cheerleading for flooding. Far from conclusive, but how else to explain not vacating even a normal amount of reservoir space in a peak snowpack year?

Climate contrarians know to be wary of argument by the principle of exclusion. That’s what the CO2 alarmists do. Eyes wide shut to extensive evidence that 20th century warming was caused by an 80 year grand maximum of solar-magnetic activity, they claim warming has to be due to CO2 because every other possible explanation has been ruled out.

But in The Case of the Waterlogged Corps(e), Sherlock’s method of exclusion is reasonable. The usual problem of failing to identify all the possibilities doesn’t apply because the list of agency objectives is specified. Of these, ”habitat restoration” is the only one that is served by the Corps’ actions.

The other possibility is that these government functionaries failed to notice that they had not vacated even the usual amount of space from their reservoirs, but low as expectations are for government work, this isn’t really plausible. Such a mistake would have to be motivated, and as Herring points out, we know these people’s motivations. Almost to a man they are eco-leftists, and we know the eco-leftist position on rivers.

It isn’t the dot-connecting that is outlandish, it is the dots. People who expressly want to see floodplains returned to their natural state followed policies that guaranteed massive flooding. Herring is right: this calls for investigation.

Rational environmentalism

To the extent that risk of flooding can be lowered by flood-control infrastructure, the extra building on floodplains that this risk-reduction encourages is perfectly rational. What induces irrational building on flood plains is the federal government’s longstanding policy of providing subsidized or implicit flood insurance.

After major flooding the government is prone to declare a disaster area. Even if the flood victims are not made whole, their losses are substantially mitigated, reducing the natural disincentive to build in flood zones. Get rid of this market interference and flood damages would be much diminished. In particular, flood plains would end up relegated mainly to agricultural uses that can weather occasional flooding with limited damage.

Seasonal flooding can actually be good for farmland so there is room for a win-win solution where flood control systems are set up to inundate large agricultural bottom lands as necessary to provide room for floodwaters. Instead of farmland on the outside of our riparian cities, substantial amounts of the best farmland would be on the inside of these cities. We see some of this now, but it would go much further if the government limited itself to infrastructure and did not interfere in markets. Safer for people, better for farming, better for migratory birds and the environment, and better for taxpayers.

Not easy to get there, after people have been building on the strength of government promises of relief for many decades, but it is a solution that is rational both economically and environmentally. Unfortunately, this is not what the eco-freaks want.

Instead of “natural” in the market-driven or liberty-driven sense, they embrace a sans-human naturalism, and it looks like the administrators of our flood-control infrastructure are in this camp. They have been hostile to flood-control infrastructure per se since the Clinton era, which is the only obvious explanation for why this infrastructure has been so completely misused.


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: flood; northdakota; obama
More Obama Admin incompetence or outright environmental terrorism. Not surprising, but also not surprising the MSM covers the flood but not the cause.
1 posted on 06/26/2011 6:52:14 AM PDT by milwguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: milwguy
It's an extension of the old EPA idea that draining wetlands is always bad. You have a swamp? You want to turn the land into a productive resource? No way. Leave it to the beavers and the mosquitoes.

Likewise, if you have farms and towns near the river, you might want steps taken to make sure that the river is controlled and the human assets protected. But that would be unnatural. The bureaucrats in Washington will make sure that the human assets are sacrificed on the altar of Mother Nature.

2 posted on 06/26/2011 6:59:32 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (The USSR spent itself into bankruptcy and collapsed -- and aren't we on the same path now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
It makes more sense to build your town UPHILL.

There are alternatives to levee systems ~

3 posted on 06/26/2011 7:02:35 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: milwguy

In out local Jackson Michigan paper the other day was a winning essay by a 4th grader. It was beautifully written and utterly false. She wrote about Michigan’s disappearing wetlands and the loss of the great flocks of blue herons.

The reality is that the wetlands have been virtually off limits since the 80s and blue herons are solitary birds.


4 posted on 06/26/2011 7:03:16 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy; milwguy

Washington, DC was built in a swampy area. Under the current insane regulatory system it would never have been built.


5 posted on 06/26/2011 7:06:29 AM PDT by tarheelswamprat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: milwguy

I’m always seeing analogies - sometimes where they exist and sometimes where they don’t exist LOL.

I see a direct analogy to the operation of the FED. In the old days, the FED’s mission was to defend the dollar. Full Stop. Nowadays, the FED’s mission is to do that AND to keep unemployment down (of course the idea that printing money leads to higher employment is a whole nother debate for a whole nother day).

Here we see the Corps moving from flood control, commercial traffic, etc. etc. to “Preserving Wetlands”.

The fact that we’ve seen this priority shift in the FED makes me think it could equally well happen in the Corps.


6 posted on 06/26/2011 7:11:24 AM PDT by 2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten (Welcome to the USA - where every day is Backwards Day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
I agree with that. I would not choose to build in a floodplain and I would not choose to build right on the coast where hurricanes can destroy buildings.

However, the whole notion of the social contract comes into play at some point. The federal government, in the past, took it upon itself to build levees, control rivers, control beach erosion, provide flood insurance, and manage waterways.

The result of such government intervention was that a lot of people made decisions to build where they should not have. It seemed safe. Uncle Sam would look out for them. Now, Uncle Sam is being Lucy with the football. Ha Ha! You're screwed!

On a larger scale, I think this is what we will see with 401(k) and with social security. The social contract will fail and the government will just take what it wants and will not worry about your assets or about existing deals.

Rousseau began talk of the Social Contract just before the French Revolution. Now the social contracts are ending, and Revolution will follow.

7 posted on 06/26/2011 7:11:27 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (The USSR spent itself into bankruptcy and collapsed -- and aren't we on the same path now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

I’m in a floodplain that didn’t exist a year ago thanks to FEMA floodplain mapping.

Pretty convenient eh?


8 posted on 06/26/2011 7:17:25 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
These flooded farmlands are going to benefit from the soil enrichment

Too bad they could not do this on a controlled method

All the houses and building would have to be built on stilts, though

President Palin had better fire ALL these communist ‘green’ nutjobs

We are at a very difficult point- it's too late to “work within the system” and too early to start shooting the ba$$ turds

9 posted on 06/26/2011 7:19:41 AM PDT by Mr. K (CAPSLOCK! -Unleash the fury! [Palin/Bachman 2012- unbeatable ticket])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: milwguy
--looks to me like the big reservoir of water vapor in the sky is "forcibly reverting floodplain to its natural state?"--
10 posted on 06/26/2011 7:19:54 AM PDT by rellimpank (--don't believe anything the media or government says about firearms or explosives--)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

As I implied in my earlier post another facet of the Social Contract is that the dollar that you earn or save today, will be worth something tomorrow. You might think that but you’d be wrong. What better way to redistribute wealth then by making most assets worthless?


11 posted on 06/26/2011 7:20:26 AM PDT by 2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten (Welcome to the USA - where every day is Backwards Day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

—I’m also in a “floodplain” in southern Pahrump, NV—and have to have mandatory flood insurance—with a yearly average of 4” rain -—


12 posted on 06/26/2011 7:22:41 AM PDT by rellimpank (--don't believe anything the media or government says about firearms or explosives--)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: milwguy

I’m torn on this.

On one hand, it’s the smart thing to do, and the USCoE rarely does the smart thing.

On the other hand, the USCoE tends to like to muck around with things.

So it could be either way.


13 posted on 06/26/2011 7:23:03 AM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

You sound like one of those backward thinkers who doesn’t realize that “flood control” magically makes flood waters disappear (rather than just intensify downstream problems).


14 posted on 06/26/2011 7:24:40 AM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rellimpank

My house is paid off so I don’t have to get flood insurance but my rates did go up due to the fact that the insurance company is required to set money aside for FEMA. My congressman has been pushing to eliminate the mandate that insurers must use the faulty FEMA maps.

I live right above a dam which means the actual floodplain is flooded year round. (We call it a lake). In may we had rain nearly every day, sometimes a couple of inches but the lake never rose more than about 2 inches. After all, the dam can only hold back so much water.


15 posted on 06/26/2011 7:27:50 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
Now, Uncle Sam is being Lucy with the football. Ha Ha! You're screwed!

Shades of 1861.

If social contracts meant anything in this country, all those slaves that were purchased from the (Northern) importers would not have been forcibly set free without compensation. But the compensation idea of Abraham Lincoln and others was shot down.

Uncle Sam's interference disincentivizes long-term planning.

16 posted on 06/26/2011 7:32:44 AM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: tarheelswamprat

“Washington, DC was built in a swampy area. Under the current insane regulatory system it would never have been built.”

Good point. Perhaps a lawsuit could be drawn up and the monster could be turned against itself.


17 posted on 06/26/2011 7:37:09 AM PDT by The Antiyuppie ("When small men cast long shadows, then it is very late in the day.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: milwguy

I know little about this specific case; but, I do know that court decisions in the last decade have made the COE subserviant to the EPA. Even the most simple permit sent to the COE must now be evaluated by the EPA. And, I know for a fact that the COE’s previous penchant for straight, clean waterways has been replaced by a desire to have ‘settling pools’ and places for fish to spawn....this is especially annoying in intermittent streams, where there are grasshoppers, but no fish.


18 posted on 06/26/2011 7:37:39 AM PDT by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lacrew

Go back two decades and you’ll see that the COE was pushing for control of such things. And three decades ago, the COE was causing floods across the country—without any wetland issues.


19 posted on 06/26/2011 7:39:47 AM PDT by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Gondring
We had a tropical storm plant itself over Central Indiana back in the 1950s ~ and it stayed for a month. Tore up jack ~ and jack included over 100,000 culverts of various dimensions throughout Marion County/Indianapolis.

And the levees didn't work except the more expensive ones used to protect the public water system's canals (which ultimately failed about 40 years later anyway).

Throughout the state it was pretty much the same. Levees didn't work, or were overwhelmed, or flooding was just simply intense everywhere and even upland areas had difficulties with ditching systems and driveway culverts, road culverts, culvert culverts, etc.

After that folks kind of abandoned the use of the OLDER SMALLER culverts and went to bigger ones, and elevated roads became popular. The state highway people began fixing low lying flood prone sections with causeways full of giant culverts ~ and fewer levees were built, or replaced.

Now this is no small issue there. The net waterflow from the Wabash as it enters the Ohio is actually larger than that of the Missouri as it enters the Mississippi. The Wabash, in turn, is fed by a series of smaller rivers that drain virtually all of the state (except the parts that drain directly to the Great Lakes or the Ohio.

There are millions of road crossings that make it possible to move around in a vast morass of cricks, streams, lakes, wallows, sloughs, rivers, and swamps ~ and virtually every road crossing is elevated at each end (so it doesn't wash away in a flood) and is built over some pretty ordinary looking steel and/or concrete culverts!

Southern Illinois is like that, and much of Ohio is too.

If you blocked flood waters in that territory with levee systems, rather than using causeways and culverts, you'd recreate the South end of Lake Michigan and the West end of Lake Erie year round, and that'd be the same big swamp the pioneers met BEFORE the 1812 earthquake that helped drain the place.

The best bet is to protect some very important spots with dykes but otherwise arrange things so the water can flow out of the area at a reasonable rate AFTER the peak flood.

Farmers should be advised to built a mound equal in height to the 500 year flood line and put their houses there.

20 posted on 06/26/2011 7:40:28 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: milwguy
I don't know the particulars of this region, but the Corp of Engineers may be recognizing the inevitable. It seems that this area of North Dakota was once on the bottom of prehistoric Lake Agassiz, which has now dried up. Now there is higher than normal rainfall in the region. It would take centuries of above normal rainfall to fill up Lake Agassiz again, but there has been several floods in this area lately, and the water is filling up basins with no good drainage, and lakes are rising. For some of these areas, letting the towns flood and leaving the area might be the only solution.

New report addresses Devils Lake flooding, lays out possible future plans

21 posted on 06/26/2011 7:41:06 AM PDT by Vince Ferrer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Your statement is posed in future tense.

Historically cities grew on banks of rivers because the river was the primary mode of transportation. Wealth was concentrated there over hundreds of years and protecting that wealth is a valid role of government.


22 posted on 06/26/2011 7:49:16 AM PDT by sgtyork (The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage. Thucydides)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: milwguy
The natives who lived in this region of the continent had a tendancy to build mounds of earth:

Kincaid Mounds State Historic Site:

Mound builder (people)


23 posted on 06/26/2011 7:52:38 AM PDT by Vince Ferrer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
Down the road...watch the Feds doing eminent domain takings based upon the reduced values associated with flood-prone areas.... It is mostly likely part of a more grandiose scheme to reduce farming in the flood plains.

Welcome to the new reality....

24 posted on 06/26/2011 7:53:31 AM PDT by pointsal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

“The actual floodplain is flooded year round (we call it a lake)” - that, is a good one.


25 posted on 06/26/2011 8:16:55 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Are there alternatives to the crop lands they are flooding, too?

Libertarians never think beyond their inane slogans.


26 posted on 06/26/2011 8:18:29 AM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tarheelswamprat

“Washington, DC was built in a swampy area. Under the current insane regulatory system it would never have been built”

Let’s insist it be allowed to return to its natural state beginning tomorrow.


27 posted on 06/26/2011 8:20:12 AM PDT by Soul of the South (When times are tough the tough get going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SaraJohnson
Obviously there are flooding conditions that will harm different sorts of croplands in different ways. There are some situations where flooding is beneficial. Indiana faces the prospect of returning to deep swamp with giant hardwood forests. Illinois faces the prospect of drying up and burning to the ground regularly. You can actually sense the incredible difference in the two places as you cross the stateline which, on a map, look like they ought to be pretty much "more of the same".

It has to do with wind, rain and temperature. The world's narrowest North/South thermocline runs from Lake Michigan to Posey County, Indiana and that creates a unique situation.

Corn loves it. But so does red wheat and soybeans ~ and the really high ticket "fancy beans" (in the Southern part of that region). There are farmers there who get three crops per year.

LESSON ~ you can always find something that will grow well on whatever soil you have, but some things do better than others. You have to match the crops to the soil. But the Lesson is that without water none of this stuff will happen, yet with too much water you can't plant the fields. You have to design all of your hydraulic control features with the idea in mind that you'd like to keep the floods away from your septic systems, yet you don't want it to gully your fields as it drains off.

Over in the vicinity of the Wabash River (remember ~ with a water flow as great as the Missouri through most of its course, and greater in part) farmers within something like 20 miles of the banks have TILED FIELDS. They actually dig trenches at the ends of fields and place field tiles in there to drain excess above the most advantageous ground water level.

I know that sounds pretty aggressive but you could use most of Indiana for rice paddies if it had a longer single crop growing season. Even in Illinois there are tiled fields along the Vermillion River (which runs parallel to the Wabash).

From my point of view the middle and upper courses of the Missouri River are fit only for dry-land farming with regular time-outs for devastating droughts every 21 or so years. The same with the upper Mississippi ~ best reserved for wheat and cattle. Just not enough water around.

The Corps of Engineers probably ought to fess up to those folks someday that they really can't do navigation, recreation, water retention and flood control in that semi-arid region. The Congress-critters who thought that could be done were trying to get more farmers out there to use vast tracts of the territory otherwise left unoccupied. I'm sure there's room for recreation, and maybe limited shipping ~ but seriously, you have something like a really long Wabash, and NO ONE has considered that navigable for commerce for a couple of centuries!

28 posted on 06/26/2011 9:00:12 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
The reality is that the wetlands have been virtually off limits since the 80s and blue herons are solitary birds.

I can confirm the latter point... we have blue herons in our area and they are NEVER seen to congregate with one another, but always are solitary. Now, Canadian Geese, however...

Photobucket

29 posted on 06/26/2011 9:07:17 AM PDT by doc11355
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tarheelswamprat

DC was built in what was then a “miasmic swamp”, which was that era’s way of saying a disease ridden swamp”.

There was no intention of Congress being in secession year round, not was there any tolerance for a huge and meddelsome/controlling Fedocracy.

Some things never change - while Yellow Fever and Malaria are gone from DC, Congress Critter seem to contract severe cases of DC Fever.

DC Fever causes severe, wracking spasms during which crazed acts of Legislation, Regulation and Spendulation occur with frightening rapidity.


30 posted on 06/26/2011 9:08:18 AM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is essential to examine principles, Kill the EPA!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

“The best bet is to protect some very important spots with dykes”

I am sure South Beach, Key West, and of course San Fransicko, can supply any number of ‘dykes’ for your flood control purposes.

I do, however, wonder how such a flood control usage could avoid the necessary “Point Source Pollution Permit” costs.

Or, is it possible that Holder would consider ‘dykes’ to be a protected class and thus immune to any permitting requirements?


31 posted on 06/26/2011 9:15:19 AM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is essential to examine principles, Kill the EPA!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: sgtyork
Historically cities grew on banks of rivers because the river was the primary mode of transportation. Wealth was concentrated there over hundreds of years and protecting that wealth is a valid role of government.

During the years of low water levels in the Missouri River lakes in South Dakota Tom Dachle US Senator (D) fought releases of water that would hurt the tourist industry in his state at the expense of barge traffic on the lower Missouri river.

It was South Dakota vs Missouri fighting for the US Army Corps of Engineers to release or not release water stored in the Missouri River dams.

Make no mistake the actions of the Corps are controlled by the politics of Washington DC.

32 posted on 06/26/2011 9:24:17 AM PDT by TYVets (Pure-Gas.org ..... ethanol free gasoline by state and city)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: milwguy

Here in South Florida we have been having a terrible drought. Sooo, the Army Corps release several feet of Lake Okeechobee in to the spillways that lead to the ocean. Thus exacerbating things.
In several places it is far too much water.
I was just in Arkansas where the Corps failed to release lake water to go along with record snows and then had to release record amounts which caused flooding.
Course you can’t say or do anything when the Corps screw up and it takes your home.
Does this damn gub mint do any f-ing thing right???


33 posted on 06/26/2011 9:25:36 AM PDT by Joe Boucher ((FUBO))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: milwguy

My wife, whose family lives in Minot, ND, and I were discussing this issue just the other day. I commented that it doesn’t make sense that water releases were not being done prior to the the snowmelt, and that this flooding in her home town, and home state should have been avoidable.


34 posted on 06/26/2011 9:31:14 AM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud dad of an Army Soldier currently deployed in the Valley of Death, Afghanistan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Building on a flood plain is for the weak of mind...thats why they are designated flood plain...


35 posted on 06/26/2011 10:32:07 AM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: goat granny

They invented the word “flood path” to trick flood plain people into thinking they were OK.


36 posted on 06/26/2011 10:33:59 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Yep, some are that stupid...Years ago one of my son’s found a beautiful piece of land really cheap...I told him to go to the township office and find out why.....It was a flood plain for a river close by. Anyone with brains wouldn’t buy it....neither did he....


37 posted on 06/26/2011 10:43:09 AM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: goat granny
When buying anything near a river it pays to understand the hydrology of the area.

There are people who LOVE to live in areas that flood regularly. Indianapolis has a nice subdivision right on the banks of the White River ~ which floods just about every year 2 or 3 times (at that spot).

They are prepared ~ and the river comes, the river goes, and they shovel the silt out, spray everything down with bleach, and move back in. Their thing is sitting in the backyard or down at the boat landing fishing if they are not right on the river. They keep boats at the ready for all sorts of things. Drink a lot of beer, barbeque outdoors every day, fresh broiled fish, drink more beer, roast porkchops, drink beer, run boat, fish, run boat, ski, run boat, barbeque......

It's a lifestyle choice ~ like being on vacation every day!

38 posted on 06/26/2011 10:48:13 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: goat granny
The issue for the poor folks at Minot is that the Corps of Engineers uses their piece of the Missouri watershed for upstream impoundment so that users downstream can be satisfied ~

They need to move their town or buy a lot of dynamite and take out every piece of concrete and levee downstream for 100 miles or so.

They will need a lot of firepower to back that up of course ~

39 posted on 06/26/2011 10:52:54 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: milwguy
According to this interview they could not release all the water they wanted to earlier in the year because ice flows would have caused major ice jams. At any rate, the cold weather and heavy snow caused this, but don't tell that to the AGW crowd.

May rains were ‘real kicker' in big water year

If they were intentionally causing these floods they would have shut down the Cooper Nuclear Plant which is very threatened by the flooding and still running. In fact they should have shut it down, but for some reason they seem to be stuck on stupid. They were shocked by the amount of flow. This is what happens when an Ice Age starts. Massive precipitation is required to build the Ice Flows.

40 posted on 06/26/2011 12:14:14 PM PDT by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

But would the MSM bother to report it? :O)


41 posted on 06/26/2011 3:48:58 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape; milwguy
You will want to keep your eye on Baffin Island to see if we've started into a period of icy buildup.

That's where the big ones start that crush Chicago!

Let us pray for the security of Baffin Island and it's ability to churn the big ice!

42 posted on 06/26/2011 4:33:08 PM PDT by muawiyah (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Hopefully humans will still be around when the next big glaciers start rolling down the mountains.

Flood wall fails at Fort Calhoun

43 posted on 06/26/2011 5:59:13 PM PDT by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson