No one is really against prosperous habitats for both wildlife and humans. But at some point there has to be a balance between what humans can expect from Mother Nature and what laws of eminent domain can be invoked to benefit a dominant species. In other words, how much should humans concede or forfeit to a lower species whose contribution to the continued development of the planet might have outlived its original purposes, or maybe isn't that important anymore.
At the risk of sounding insensitive to the pallid sturgeon in the Missouri River....oh, the hell with it. The spring floods in 2011 illustrate the dilemma. The human habitat of the Missouri River Basin (crops, property, businesses, infrastructure and homes) was devastated when the reservoir and flood control systems couldn't contain the enormous buildup of water from the unusually large snow pack melt and continuous spring rains. In Missouri, water inundated 450 square miles, destroying 284,000 acres of cropland and causing $1.3 billion worth of damages to the flood control infrastructure alone. All told, the flood racked up a total of $5 billion in losses.
While the Army Corps of Engineers bore the brunt of the criticism, even being accused of incorrectly forecasting the weather, blame more aptly should be placed on other federal agencies that actually control more of the Basin's operation budget. Their priorities seem to favor the preservation of the pallid sturgeon over the economy of the region and the livelihoods of the farmers. One board member of the Missouri Levee and Drainage District (MLDD) said the flooding occurred because the Army Corps of Engineers was not encouraged to release the rising waters from the reservoirs earlier.
In the Kansas City flood plain area, flood control systems (dams, reservoirs and levees) protect 2,900 businesses that employ 60,000 people and generate $12.5 billion in sales. The commercial and residential structures are valued at $15 billion and contribute $26 million in local real estate taxes.
But it appears the Fish and Wildlife Service was more concerned about protecting species-habitat and recreational areas than preventing catastrophic flooding of the entire region. The Fish and Wildlife Service is the dominant agency involved in Missouri River Basin operations and claims the lion's share of the federal budget allocated to those activities. Of the $80 million federal outlay to the Missouri Rive Basin,
only $7 million is earmarked for dam, reservois and flood control construction and repair. The rest is reserved for the pet (so to speak) projects of the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Ironically, because the feds kept the spigots closed to preserve the pallid sturgeons' habitat during the early spring floodwater buildup, they could only watch helplessly as sturgeon breeding pools were violently washed away when the floodgates could no longer restrain the pressure .
At the risk of sounding insensitive to the pallid sturgeon in the Missouri River....oh, the hell with it. The spring floods in 2011 illustrate the dilemma. The human habitat of the Missouri River Basin (crops, property, businesses, infrastructure and homes) was devastated when the reservoir and flood control systems couldn't contain the enormous buildup of water from the unusually large snow pack melt and continuous spring rains. In Missouri, water inundated 450 square miles, destroying 284,000 acres of cropland and causing $1.3 billion worth of damages to the flood control infrastructure alone. All told, the flood racked up a total of $5 billion in losses.
While the Army Corps of Engineers bore the brunt of the criticism, even being accused of incorrectly forecasting the weather, blame more aptly should be placed on other federal agencies that actually control more of the Basin's operation budget. Their priorities seem to favor the preservation of the pallid sturgeon over the economy of the region and the livelihoods of the farmers. One board member of the Missouri Levee and Drainage District (MLDD) said the flooding occurred because the Army Corps of Engineers was not encouraged to release the rising waters from the reservoirs earlier.
In the Kansas City flood plain area, flood control systems (dams, reservoirs and levees) protect 2,900 businesses that employ 60,000 people and generate $12.5 billion in sales. The commercial and residential structures are valued at $15 billion and contribute $26 million in local real estate taxes.
But it appears the Fish and Wildlife Service was more concerned about protecting species-habitat and recreational areas than preventing catastrophic flooding of the entire region. The Fish and Wildlife Service is the dominant agency involved in Missouri River Basin operations and claims the lion's share of the federal budget allocated to those activities. Of the $80 million federal outlay to the Missouri Rive Basin,
only $7 million is earmarked for dam, reservois and flood control construction and repair. The rest is reserved for the pet (so to speak) projects of the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Ironically, because the feds kept the spigots closed to preserve the pallid sturgeons' habitat during the early spring floodwater buildup, they could only watch helplessly as sturgeon breeding pools were violently washed away when the floodgates could no longer restrain the pressure .
RSS Feed
