🚀 go-pugleaf

This issue somewhat relates to an area I'm actively involved in, although it's
far from Calif.  I do water-quality work in a highly cultivated river basin (Red
River of the North) that has many existing and proposed flood-control
structures.  I don't work closely with dam issues, so I don't pretend understand
them.  But I look forward to seeing some objective statements from experts that
deal with these issues professionally, or from those who have problems with
current paradigms in solving water/flooding issues.

Some considerations are: 

1. Historical context--Over the past century, we've altered the landscape to
farm or provide shelter for humans.  Some activities (wetland drainage, ditches,
tilling of land) have excacerbated flooding, and some such activities now may be
considered by many to be bad ideas.  If we knew then what the effects of all our
development would have been, perhaps we would have developed differently (e.g. 
not in floodplains).  So what we're faced with is implementing solutions (or
ignoring real problems) in an era in which policies and public opinion may have
come full circle from decades past.  [It's perhaps not that simple.  There seems
to be a wide spectrum of both policy and public opinion these days, whereas in
previous times, development of agriculture and engineering landscapes to fit
agricultural needs may have been more universally accepted.]

2. Fish--This has been mentioned briefly in the thread.  From what I've read or
heard on NPR, Western U.S. fish stocks have declined both from overfishing AND
dam building.  Is that true?  How (quantitatively) does this fit into the
overall economic impact of dams?    

3. For flood control, what are the economic and environmental considerations of
one large dam downstream that captures peak runoff from a large area, or many
small dams and/or created [or restored] wetlands higher up in a watershed? 

4. In the most flood-prone areas, what land uses are acceptable?  Is it better
to relocate out of the area, perhaps allowing agriculture but not human
habitation; or to attempt to control the flooding through engineering solutions?
[It's probably not economical (nor desirable from a historical/cultural
standpoint) to move New Orleans, but in lower-density areas, at what point does
it become economical?  Who should pay for relocation?  For flood control?]


-- Mark E. Brigham, Environmental Engineer -- email: mbrigham@usgs.gov U. S.
Geological Survey, 2280 Woodale Drive, Mounds View, MN 55112-0049 WWW:
http://wwwmn.cr.usgs.gov/