U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Dakota > Fargo
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-01-2014, 06:50 PM
 
266 posts, read 550,459 times
Reputation: 270

Advertisements

I would like some questions answered or maybe more clarification on the particular's of how the Fargo-Moorhead Flood Diversion Channel (Canal) is designed to work and where exactly will it be built. Importantly, please help me understand what the objections/drawbacks are to the proposed project? Is this designed to protect against the spring flooding disasters of 1979 and 1997 in the Red River Valley?

I understand that Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton is filing a lawsuit to make changes to the route and would like the Minnesota D.N.R. to further study environmental impacts of the project. I know this is hotly debated issue among candidates for the Clay County Commissioner elections on the Moorhead side of the Red River.

We all agree more needs to be done to protect the entire Red River Valley from the all to regular spring time flooding which occurs following the snow melt. Are they worried about protecting the F-M Metro area at the expense of inceasingly flooding small towns and Sugar-Beat farms downstream? Keep in mind, the Red River Valley has the most fertile soil for growing crops in the entire world, and Fargo-Moorhead is one of the fastest growing metro area's in the United States. Is there concern on the Minnesota side that too much attention is being paid to the needs of Fargo while they feel Moorhead has been ignored in the design/ planning? How does Whapeton and Breckenridge figure into the flood diversion plan?

In the future, winters with heavy accumulating snows will continue to occur followed by floods caused by snow melt, so lets complete this and do it right!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-01-2014, 06:57 PM
 
741 posts, read 1,484,215 times
Reputation: 491
Quote:
Originally Posted by mn55110 View Post
I would like some questions answered or maybe more clarification on the particular's of how the Fargo-Moorhead Flood Diversion Channel (Canal) is designed to work and where exactly will it be built. Importantly, please help me understand what the objections/drawbacks are to the proposed project? Is this designed to protect against the spring flooding disasters of 1979 and 1997 in the Red River Valley?

I understand that Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton is filing a lawsuit to make changes to the route and would like the Minnesota D.N.R. to further study environmental impacts of the project. I know this is hotly debated issue among candidates for the Clay County Commissioner elections on the Moorhead side of the Red River.

We all agree more needs to be done to protect the entire Red River Valley from the all to regular spring time flooding which occurs following the snow melt. Are they worried about protecting the F-M Metro area at the expense of inceasingly flooding small towns and Sugar-Beat farms downstream? Keep in mind, the Red River Valley has the most fertile soil for growing crops in the entire world, and Fargo-Moorhead is one of the fastest growing metro area's in the United States. Is there concern on the Minnesota side that too much attention is being paid to the needs of Fargo while they feel Moorhead has been ignored in the design/ planning? How does Whapeton and Breckenridge figure into the flood diversion plan?

In the future, winters with heavy accumulating snows will continue to occur followed by floods caused by snow melt, so lets complete this and do it right!
Minnesota did not want a diversion on the Minnesota side, even though it would have cost 500 million less and helped Moorhead more. With the Federal government and the state of North Dakota largely taking the financial brunt, Dayton is unconcerned about the cost of the project or the cost of the not having the project before a record flood.

The diversion is unpopular south of Fargo because it is designed to create a lake for a number of miles south Fargo, effectively creating a zone where no one can live, even though thousands live there now.

In addition, the downstream effects are pretty nasty to places like Hendrum, Halstad, Shelly, Thompson, and maybe even Grand Forks, as the crests are expected to be several feet higher.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Dakota > Fargo
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top