Posted on 05/01/2011 2:38:38 PM PDT by Hawk720
Missouri on Sunday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to halt a plan to intentionally breach a levee on the rain-swollen Mississippi River, flooding Missouri farmland in an effort to save an Illinois town.
Earlier, Missouri filed a federal suit to block the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from following through on its plan to breach the Birds Point-New Madrid levee. A federal judge on Friday ruled against Missouri, saying a 1928 law permits the breach of the levee to ease pressure on the river.
Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster filed an application for an injunction to the high court on Sunday. It was assigned to Justice Samuel Alito, according to the U.S. Supreme Court's website.
The Corps of Engineers says the action is necessary to save the town of Cairo, Illinois, although it will flood rural Missouri farm communities. "I know that the price being paid is high," said Maj. Gen. Michael Walsh on Saturday.
"Demolition of the levee, however, will cause serious flooding across large portions of Mississippi County," Koster's office said in a statement Thursday, when the federal suit was filed.
Koster believes the 1928 law is unclear "as to whether the Corps of Engineers actually has authority to make the decision to detonate the levee," the statement said.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
The town didnt build it’s wall high enough.....too bad....that shouldnt give them the right to flood others out to save their own asses...
AND it might not even work....
The farmer's whose land would be flooded are not Eric Holder's people.
Coincidence?
I’m with you. Breach the levee on the Illinois side and flood them.
If I was governor, I’d at least send out the State troopers. It was a mistake to turn to the courts.
The best bet at this point might be to steal a march on the enemy, and blow the Illinois levees.
This bullshit of we flood your land and then we'll pay you whatever the hell we feel like is not Constitutional.
Residents of Cairo IL now under mandatory evacuation order.
I'd have more sympathy if the voters hadn't opposed building a new reservoir back in the 90's.
We certainly supported it—but were outvoted, obviously.....
Our town had flood control applied to a scenic creek area that
had flooded before. NO guarantee of preventing ALL future floods - but new apartments built right down almost to edge
of new creek.....mistake.
I don’t know that the C.O.E. will have to pay any damages. It seems like the farmers (or more likely their great-grandfathers) signed an easement that excludes damages for flowing water in the case of the levy being blown. The floodway (rightly or wrongly) was designed with this very situation in mind—take the pressure off of the levees by diverting a part of the flow of the river.
What I’d like to know is if the levees are blown, what happens if the Mississippi decides it likes its new channel better? Isn’t that how rivers change courses—during floods?
Exactly. I'm from Louisiana, near the Morganza Floodway (on the east side of the Mississippi). If the Morganza Floodway is opened, the flood waters of the Mississippi will be diverted to the Atchafalya River and floodplain.
On the west side, past the Atchafalaya Rivier (but still in the Mississippi floodplain), lies the town of Simmesport, completely surrounded by levees. To the west of Simmesport is another levee. "If" the Morganza Floodway isn't enough to keep South Louisiana from flooding, the plan is to blow up that levee, and provide another path to the Atchafalya floodplain for the excess water.
Anybody who built/builds in that area is told up front that they have no recourse if it is necessary to blow that levee......."build at your own risk", but many have.
This appears to be a similar plan and law.
I'd have more sympathy if the voters hadn't opposed building a new reservoir back in the 90's
Where was this proposed project planned to be? With the flood of Northerners who are acclimated to kentucky blue grass and other water intensive plants, and with their penchant for voting Yes on any government project or bond issue, I wonder if they could do it again?
This is being presented as a ‘land vs lives’ decision. There are several things wrong with this argument...but I’ll concentrate on one:
They have already evacuated 280 people from the Missouri side...and are asking another 600 to leave.
Cairo has a population of 2,800....it looks like at least 280 people in Missouri will lose their homes (perhaps 880, but I’m not sure).
So its not ‘land vs lives’. Its ‘these people are greater in number, so you draw the short straw today’.
This type of logic can take a long trip down a slippery slope....and frankly it is frightening.
Also, the article is not very clear; but I think it states the Cairo wall is 64 ft, while the river is expected to crest at 61. It should be tall enough....but apparently they are not confident it will actually hold. Whose fault is that?
I remember in 1993, there was alot of debate over whether or not the levee system caused more damage than it prevented, because those not protected by it were subjected to higher flood waters (caused by constraint between levees). I am a strong proponent of levees, and don’t agree with this line of thinking....but are there actually people at the COE who are making the case that levees actually CAUSE problems? This case seems to indicate that.
If the COE is going to start bean counting and playing favorites, I think they should look at productivity. How much federal income tax was derived from the Missouri side, vs Cairo...who wants to bet Cairo’s is a negative number. Wouldn’t it make more sense to keep the fields and destroy
Alas, I hope those barges loaded with explosives don’t simultaneously blow the Missouri levee, and send a wave which destrpys the Cairo side.
We certainly supported it—but were outvoted, obviously.....
Is this the reservoir the LCRA proposed back in the late 90's? It seems to be back on track now.
It would be interesting to compare those statistics with those of New Orleans and the Mississippi Gulf Coast, circa August, 2005.
I’m not sure who proposed it.
I’ve been trying to remember that - it’s been a long time. My recollection is that it was between San Antonio and the coast, not up in the hill country.
>>>>So its not ‘land vs lives’. Its ‘these people are greater in number, so you draw the short straw today’.
Coming soon to a Dr’s office near you if 0bama-care isn’t killed and defunded: Sorry sir... but we can either treat you, or 3 others with the same money spent, so go plan your funeral.
If the fed owns the rights to who gets flooded and who doesn’t we already know where the racist in chief stands. By-By productive farmland.
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.