Environmental Groups Opposed Flood Protection

GotZoom

Senior Member
Apr 20, 2005
5,719
368
48
Cordova, TN
Washington, D.C., September 13, 2005—Amid the slow recovery of the Gulf Coast from the destruction of Hurricane Katrina, a great deal of criticism has fallen on the shoulders of the Bush administration and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for an allegedly insufficient commitment to fortifying anti-flood levees. Mostly unremarked upon, however, has been the opposition of environmental activist groups to building levees in the first place.

“The groups argued that the ‘natural’ way would lead to better river management, but it was clear they had other agendas in mind besides flood control,” writes Competitive Enterprise Institute Journalism Fellow John Berlau. “They were concerned because levees were allegedly threatening their beloved exotic animals and plants. In his congressional testimony, American Rivers’s [Jeffrey] Stein noted that the Mississippi River was home to ‘double-crested cormorant, rare orchids, and many other species,’ which he implied were put at risk by man-made levees.”

Groups including American Rivers and the Sierra Club sued in federal court in 1996 to prevent the Army Corps of Engineers from proceeding with a planned upgrade to 303 miles of levees in Louisiana, Mississippi and Arkansas. An Army Corps spokesman observed at the time that a failure of the levees in question “could wreak catastrophic consequences on Louisiana and Mississippi which the states would be decades in overcoming.” The lawsuit succeeded in delaying the project for two years while further environmental impact studies were completed.

Environmental opposition to federal dam and levee projects in recent years has championed a state of “natural” river flows, even when it appears that that goal will conflict with protecting the safety of people from potential flooding. Hopefully in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, flood management policy will always favor the “safe” policy over the “natural” one.


http://www.cei.org/gencon/003,04828.cfm

-----

Just like the old expression says: Be careful what you ask for.
 
GotZoom said:
Washington, D.C., September 13, 2005—Amid the slow recovery of the Gulf Coast from the destruction of Hurricane Katrina, a great deal of criticism has fallen on the shoulders of the Bush administration and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for an allegedly insufficient commitment to fortifying anti-flood levees. Mostly unremarked upon, however, has been the opposition of environmental activist groups to building levees in the first place.

“The groups argued that the ‘natural’ way would lead to better river management, but it was clear they had other agendas in mind besides flood control,” writes Competitive Enterprise Institute Journalism Fellow John Berlau. “They were concerned because levees were allegedly threatening their beloved exotic animals and plants. In his congressional testimony, American Rivers’s [Jeffrey] Stein noted that the Mississippi River was home to ‘double-crested cormorant, rare orchids, and many other species,’ which he implied were put at risk by man-made levees.”

Groups including American Rivers and the Sierra Club sued in federal court in 1996 to prevent the Army Corps of Engineers from proceeding with a planned upgrade to 303 miles of levees in Louisiana, Mississippi and Arkansas. An Army Corps spokesman observed at the time that a failure of the levees in question “could wreak catastrophic consequences on Louisiana and Mississippi which the states would be decades in overcoming.” The lawsuit succeeded in delaying the project for two years while further environmental impact studies were completed.

Environmental opposition to federal dam and levee projects in recent years has championed a state of “natural” river flows, even when it appears that that goal will conflict with protecting the safety of people from potential flooding. Hopefully in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, flood management policy will always favor the “safe” policy over the “natural” one.


http://www.cei.org/gencon/003,04828.cfm

-----

Just like the old expression says: Be careful what you ask for.

I'm having a row with a nitwit on another board
who wants to DESTROY ALL the levees, and have
the riverside populations abandon their homes and
businesses, and move as far away from the river
as needed to be safe from flooding (how far would
that have to be- 20 miles?!)

I am all in favor of conservation, and I do not by
any means trust the Army Corps of Engineers
completely (WHY did the NO river and lake levees
hold up, while the canal ones failed?), but we
must take whatever steps needed to keep the
levees improved and upgraded, or else we are
going to have more calamities like the one in NO.
 

Forum List

Back
Top