Update: Spoke to the Corps this morning, including a Mr. Gary Walker, Senior Project Manager, about the different zones in the levee plan. There is a no-vegetation zone from the toe of the levee out to fifteen feet away from the levee. The one hundred foot zone is from the top of the bank and extends towards the levee. The Corps said the purpose was to clear vegetation within the levees in order to improve river flow (See Pearl River at Lakeland Drive or by Fortification.) and that it won't go past the outer tow of the levee. In many cases, it won't even reach the levee itself. I was told the top of the bank was where the river met the bank at its natural river stage.
Original post:
One criticism of the Army Corps of Engineer's levee plan is the so-called "scorched earth" policy. The "scorched earth" claim refers to the Corps' no-vegetation policy for levees. the no-vegetation policy has generated a firestorm of criticism as the Corps seeks to implement it from California to Monroe, Louisiana to Mississippi.
The Corps issued new regulations after Hurricane Katrina about the presence of vegetation on levees. It decreed a zone of fifteen feet from the toe of the levee was to be grass-only: no trees, shrubs, or similar plant life. Proponents of such a policy argue trees and similar vegetation weaken the levees over time and removal of such greenery results in lower flood stages as well as a faster flow when it is needed.
The AP reported last year:
"The Army Corps of Engineers is on a mission to chop down every tree in the country that grows within 15 feet of a levee — including oaks and sycamores in Louisiana, willows in Oklahoma and cottonwoods in California.
The corps is concerned that the trees' roots could undermine barriers meant to protect low-lying communities from catastrophic floods like the ones caused by Hurricane Katrina.
An Associated Press survey of levee projects nationwide shows that the agency wants to eliminate all trees along more than 100,000 miles of levees....
In 2006, the corps began sending hundreds of letters to levee districts across the nation, ordering them to cut down "unwanted woody vegetation," a prospect that could cost many of the districts millions of dollars each in timber-clearing expenses.
Inspectors began an inventory of the levee system and told districts to fill in animal burrows, repair culverts and patch up erosion.
If they fail to comply, the agencies risk higher flood insurance premiums and a loss of federal funding..." Article
This policy generated a storm of controversy in nearby Ouachita Parish when the Corps proposed clear-cutting trees for a 200-mile section of the Ouachita River for a width of 15 feet on each side of the levee. The President of the Ouachita River Foundation stated on its website the Corps changed the zone from 15 feet to 100 feet. However, sources at the Foundation have told JJ it is now working with the Corps and that the no-vegetation policy is implemented on a case-by-case basis (Involving studies and other analysis.). Ouachita River Foundation website
The Corps proposed a 100-foot section on each side of the levee (from the toe) be cleared of all vegetation in a 2007 feasibility study. Appendix II, Section V, Paragraph 26 states:
"The Levee Plan from the 1996 Jackson Metropolitan Area Feasibility study consists of constructing approximately 21.9 miles of new levee, 3,720 feet of floodwall, enlarging 10.5 miles of the existing Jackson and East Jackson levees, building 9 box culverts and 9 concrete pipe water control structures, and constructing landslide connecting ditches. Limited overbank clearing will be required to reduce stages at Lakeland Drive and minimize adverse impacts to the tailwater on the Ross Barnett Spillway. This overbank clearing consists of a 100-foot strip on each side of the channel top bank from RM 290.5 to 301.5 and a 400-foot strip across six bendways. Plates 4-V-1 through 4-V-17 show the proposed alignment of the levee and the location of the major drainage structures and landslide connecting ditches." See page 137
However, Corps spokesman Kavanaugh Breazale told JJ this week "a no-vegetation zone 15 feet from the toe of the levee is recommended for the proposed enhancements to the levee system" in Jackson. Mr. Breazale was pretty adamant about the 15-foot zone being the width of the no-vegetation zone and that the 100-foot recommendation in the 2007 draft was not the width that will be used by the Corps.
Related article
Friday, January 29, 2010
Corps: Levee Plan will only require a 15 ft. "No Veg" zone
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
26 comments:
"Bait and Switch", here we come.
You gotta LOVE these guys.
Regardless, 15' * 2 * levee base width is still going to be a huge swath of river bank woodlands that be destroyed.
I personally cannot wait for the well-maintained park, kayaking opportunities, and nature trail that will come with levees. I just know our government will make this green space an attractive part of the community.
Right?
The fifteen feet of clearance at the toe is only the tip of the iceberg you can see above water.
The levees themselves are going to be hundreds of feet wide at the bottom. If I recall correctly the mid-90s Corps calculations required a levee that was over 900 feet wide at Eubanks Creek.
AND if you don't know already there are going to be thousands of feet of landside (meaning dry side) ditches along the levees to drain rainfall that doesn't now flow into the major creeks that flow through, and empty, Jackson. THOUSANDS of feet of these ditches. If memory serves those ditches become the equivalent of man-made creeks themselves upwards of 20 feet deep. Those ditches also must be maintained vegetation free. (Imagine neighborhood kids falling into those.)
So the toes are important but the vast damage will be done by the huge levees, the landside ditches and the construction right-of-way.
2:13 - I remember learning this while reviewing why levees worked so well in New Orleans...
I wonder if the 15' clear area at the toe and the 100' clear area are for different purposes. The 15' clearance at the to is to protect the structural integrity of the levee by preventing root growth & such. The 100' clear area MAY be intended to ensure a clear path for an adequate volume of water to pass through.
One of the key arguments for the Two Lakes plan is that pond of water will prevent the growth of trees and brush and allow the volume of water to pass though. This is needed since the area between Lakeland and Downtown restricts flow thus causing the water to backup upstream of there.
KF, plESse call your buddy Kav Breazeale, and ask him to come to a public hearing on all of these revelations....ON THE RECORD.
You will NEVER get the Corps to agree to a public Q and A.
Why not? The JFP must have a direct line to them, you know, being the "comprehensive coverage agents".
KF, what is the "Levee Lake Development Corporation"?
Ask the JFP. I am sure they know.
I have to say, why are the Pearl River/Rez folks so quiet on this. Folks, this is bigger than just a misunderstanding about what will work levee-wise, etc. Why the introduction of the bill to dismantle the PR water agency? Why the obvious foolish attempts to build, not build? Why is everyone running from this? There are a lot of unanswered questions and no one is looking at the obvious.
But what do I know? I just like to see everyone here and wish you Good Morning!
Based on the results of your survey KF--why not grow weed?
Hell no biggee. Just a life changing (possibly) experience for hundreds of thousands. WTF. Go with all the kayaking, camp grounds yadayadayada, like the treehuggers have been building all of these years.
So 7:24PM, you own a boat? Ride on a boat? Enjoy the natural habitat at all? Hunt? Fish...STFU nature hater. Or should I say anti-tree hugger....
And...7:24PM if you have ever been there dying of Cancer, you might rethink your statement when the one you love is withering away because they cannot gather the strength to garner an appetite, move their withered bones, relieve themselves of the pain...you just don't know. Morphine is not the solution.
Woah....LSD flashback!
When a community has an opportunity to engage in a project of this scope (Two Lakes), with a "win-win" possible as it relates to flooding and economic development, and the community (as a whole) does not fully explore these options, then they get (or DON'T get) what they deserve.
The problem with the "Two Lakes" proposal, is that it remains a "tussle" between arguing sets of engineers on each side of the issue, and not between the people of the communities themselves.
AMEN brother, AMEN.
The 100 foot the corps is talking of is not at the levee toe - but streamside. This is in addition to the 15' at the toe of the levees. An 11 mile stretch from waterworks to the res. cleared both sides of the river 100' back and 400' clearing across the bendways.
A swath of clear cutting that will make the harvest on JPS' 16th section property appear to be a very small weeding.
All in the name of 'flood control' but we all know Donna that flood control isn't why you are opposed to Two Lakes.
She has no clue how much she is being used. Its quite amusing.
You can't make this stuff up.
Ole Donner Kaye is so paranoid about "Two Lakes" she had a reporter snooping around on a hunch she had. Seems Madam Ladd thought one of the "Two Lakes Supporters" had a $175,000 yacht hidden behind his house, anxiously awaiting the completion of the lake, so he could slip it in there.
That, she believed, was the reason for his support. OH REALLY!
She is being played like a yo yo.
Another person Lynch interviewed told me he would try to find Two Lakes in Green Eggs and Ham.
What are you talking about, fish?
Post a Comment