by INFORUM
Oxbow hopes delay leads to demise of diversion plan
May 15, 2011 at 7:00 pm in INFORUM
OXBOW, N.D. Amid ongoing frustrations with a proposed Red River diversion that in its current form threatens to wipe this city of a few hundred off the map, Oxbow residents and City Council members met Sunday night to discuss the best way to put up a fight.
Continue Reading
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
59 
81
Vertigo, I hope you realize that there are more people impacted by this dam/diversion than what is represented here in this article. In fact, there will be 1,000s! To stand back & do nothing is not an option & to say “these people they are clueless” is absolutely not true. There are so many costs & factors not even considered in this dam/diversion plan as of yet. Much of the impacted areas have not even been fully studied yet & the Corp wants to keep pushing thru because of a deadline?? Its not right to leave people in the dark on these facts & to keep telling them we’ll take care of you once the funding goes thru. Would you go for that? No one would.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
59 
16
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
8 
25
Vertigo, as you know everything written in the paper should not be interpreted as 100% true…same as this article. I personally would LOVE to see the Forum print the breakdown of the diversion costs, all the areas being affected by this dam/diversion (not just the areas within the so called “staging areas”), the extra costs the locals & the state of ND will need to pony-up due to the current shortage being taken in…anything of factual value. Why has nothing like this been published? Might let the Fargo people know too much & they might not like what they see.
There ARE & will be other proactive solutions that are being looked at & will be presented to the Corp, if only they’re willing to listen to them.
As for these areas working on their own flood protection, Oxbow completed theirs, & the rest of the communities are ABOVE flood level, however, if the dam/diversion goes thru how to you battle 8 ft of water?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
21 
3
Vertigo is right about one thing — trying to out engineer the river is a recipe for trouble. Look at the people along the Mississippi who built their levees only to watch them be blown apart by the Corps so the water could consume the natural flood plain. The only difference is here it is the reverse situation. The Corp is devising a plan to protect the flood plain and those who have built on the flood plan plus those who would wish to build there as part of Fargo’s reach to grab more land to expand —all at the expense of those who live above the flood plain and have never had flood issues. Case in point — Rutten (Water) Park this spring is clearly in the 100-year flood plain, and yet Fargo wants to protect that land and instead flood out communities who do not live in the flood plain (that is, until Fargo builds its nice little dam project). Who does not see a disaster waiting to happen here?
Like or Dislike:
7 
2
I’m curious as to why Oxbow is “showing their cards” so early in the game. I wouldn’t be letting Fargo know about what my strategies are. The other frustrating piece to this is that they appear to be going at this on their own. They need to be talking to and including the folks in the surrounding areas that are going to be impacted. If the Corps of Fargo (ooops, I mean the Corps of Engineers and the City of Fargo) are able to overcome one entity at a time, like Oxbow, they will slowly get what they want, once piece at a time. If everyone bands together, that will be a harder challenge for those pushing for the diversion. Get together people!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
56 
25
@ Vertigo -
By “these people,” do you mean Oxbow? Because if that’s your argument, then the same is true for Fargo, Moorhead, and the rest of the surrounding region. Oxbow and Hickson are being unfairly targeted in this scam.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
47 
27
Kim, I mean everybody, Fargo, Oxbow, Grand Forks and all the other communities in the Red River Valley Watershed. I really don’t see how you view Fargo trying to protect itself as any more of a scam than Oxbows efforts to do the same. They are all trying to avoid the mid march backstroke.
The reality is, the Red River is going to flood, and if global warming predictions are true, its only going to get much worse. Eventually all the water released from the icecaps will have to go somewhere and we are going to revert back to the shallow sea it once was.
The Red River Valley is a new geology, and it sits on a soft clay that erodes quickly, and the river bed is going to change because of this also. If we build a diversion, there is nothing guaranteeing there won’t be a major riverbed shift going far away from the diversion. It has happened, we just haven’t seen it happen recently because we have been here such a short time.
Getting back to our immediate problem though, when the Red floods it erodes a deeper and deeper valley. Building dikes are going to create an island in the middle of this valley, but eventually the river is still going to win and eat away that Island.
Building the Diversion only channels the water to the North, funneling its power and creating faster erosion for those communities to the north.
The only way to stop this from happening is to stop the water upstream and slowly release it so it minimizes the erosion.
Like or Dislike:
10 
16
Vertigo, there is a HUGE difference between Oxbow’s dikes that protected their city than Fargo’s plan to build a dam/diversion that will hold huge amounts of water back whipping out entire communities & farmland & produce water issues all the way back to Abercrombie if not further. Even the Corps doesn’t know the full extent.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
19 
4
I would like to wish Oxbow all the luck in the world. But they do need to band with Hickson, Richland and Wilkin counties. Along with any land owner with a elevation of 922 feet or less south of Fargo.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
59 
12
Rural Cass residents could and should band up too!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
48 
10
How to stop the project was well spelled out in the environmental attorney’s letter from West Fargo. When the Corps read that, they said well I guess we will forget it then, and then West Fargo backed off and said no, we just wanted the west route, not stop the project.
All you have to do is document what that attorney said was true and the project pretty well will go away.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
41 
12
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
18 
53
Maybe Fargonians should sue the city of Oxbow and add to the legal fun. In the end the lawyers will win.
Hot debate. What do you think?
30 
33
Unfortunately for all the smaller communities involved they will need to accept at some point that they will be considered collateral damage. It is a utilitarian project aimed at protecting the vast majority of homes and small communities will be forced to accept that while individually they are all important people, when looking at the big picture they are collectively not significant compared to the collective whole. Again, this isn’t saying that each individual person isn’t important, but when the option come down to protecting hundreds of thousands and sacrificing just hundreds, that is a willing utilitarian strategy.
The best recent example similar to this is what is going on in Louisiana with the opening of the Morganza Floodway. By opening this they will flood a flood plane the size of Connecticut and will potentially flood out 28,000 houses. They are willing to do this to protect the much larger communities of Baton Rough and New Orleans. That is not to say they don’t care about the other home owners, but when the choice is flooding out hundreds of thousands of houses and businesses, or 28,000 the choice became obvious.
Hot debate. What do you think?
39 
30
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
29 
40
SST: I refuse to be considered collateral damage. The Corps simply did not research the upstream impacts. I agree that Fargo needs flood protection, but there are other ways to accomplish this without destroying communities. There are other options available such as upstream retention that will accomplish the same goal as this dam will that will not cause any damage to upstream communities.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
39 
21
Pat, I hope you’re right. I would prefer that no community needs to be sacrificed to accomplish adequate flood protection. Unfortunately for every community involved, these towns all sprung up on a gigantic flood plain, and for whatever reason the Fargo-Moorhead community has become the largest and most economically important. Again, please don’t take this to mean that I, or indeed that most people, think all the other smaller communities are somehow not important, and more specifically that I don’t feel the individuals, families, and friendships within those communities are not important.
Overall the whole situation sucks, but at some point the decision has to be made, which option provides the greatest benefit and the least harm.
If you are correct in saying there are options for retention (and truthfully I always wondered why the “waffle” plan was not explored more) which have been modeled and proved viable for preventing major flooding within the major economic centers and would spare all the other upstream communities, then I would be all for that.
However if the retention model simply shifts the burden of flooding to other small communities which will be flooded out instead, and simply spares your town, then you are guilty of being self-serving in your asking for that option instead, because the overall damage is the same, its just that it is not happening to your town, but to the town of your neighbors.
Again, if there is an option which both prevents flooding in F-M and also spares all the other towns, then I of course think that is obviously the best.
When it comes to flood protection though, everyone needs to understand it will always be a utilitarian argument.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
32 
5
With the use of flood walls and dikes Fargo could be protected with out flooding the neighbors to the south.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
37 
9
@SST
The issue you bring up that is NOT true SST is that the VAST majority of the affected area (Hickson, Bakke, Oxbow) is NOT in a flood plain right now. I live less than a 1/2 mile (as crow flys) from the red in Hickson and my house/yard, according to the Army Corp of Engineers, is NOT in the current floodplain!! I have not needed flood insurance or even worried about flooding from the previous years “floods”. So, fargo’s proposed diversion/dike/whatever is flooding an area that wouldn’t normally (at least for the last 125+ years that the Hickson area has been around) flood and pooling 8+ inches of additional water on top of us. Plus the fact that Hickson/oxbow/bakke is MINIMUM 17 feet HIGHER than fargo elevation should be enough to show you how ridiculous and one sided this plan is! I’m not an engineer but how does it make sense to store what on higher ground? Water flows downhill last time I checked….
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
38 
7
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
7 
18
I totally disagree with that, SST. These small communities were here & have thrived well over a 100 yrs & have made ND what it is today. To totally disregard small communities is an arrogant viewpoint.
Hot debate. What do you think?
38 
24
The difference is that there are other options besides the dam. Holding water back in a waffle plan — a little here, a little there — across the entire Red River watershed is the solution that helps safeguard Fargo and others who have chosen to build on the 100-year flood plain and does not sacrifice those south of Fargo who do not live on flood lands. There is no one silver bullet to solve this issue. It’s more like the shotgun approach with multiple BBs targeted in a pattern across the region to bring about a solution. A smaller diversion coupled with retention across the basin plus a greenway through Fargo makes more sense than destroying six communities south of Fargo in four counties just so Fargo can grab more land in the flood plain in their bid to sprawl further south.
Like or Dislike:
4 
3
Just a point in fact, Oxbow hasn’t been around over 100 years.
Hot debate. What do you think?
25 
18
Yes, but Hickson, Christine, & Comstock all were. Please remember this takes into account more than just Oxbow.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
30 
9
I stand corrected. I would like to add, I’m not really in favor of a diversion. I prefer greenways through F-M with additional diking/floodwalls. However, this won’t solve the Oxbow.Hickson, Christine and Comstock issues. If the F-M area flood issues are (somewhat) resolved using those approaches I listed, those towns and others won’t be getting much, if any, disaster aid like they would now.
Like or Dislike:
13 
9
Exactly what “issues” are you referring to for these communities? As far as I know Oxbow took care of their own flood problems with dikes (a good portion of the town has never even flood & doesn’t even need this protection); Hickson, the Bakke subdivision, & Comstock are all on high elevations & have never flooded & aren’t even in the flood plain. Not sure what you mean?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
29 
4
Anyone see what’s happening down South? They sacrificed a few for the greater good by opening up a spillway to alleviate flooding other areas. It can and will happen here too so get ready for it.
Hot debate. What do you think?
17 
26
Facts are that Fargo is much larger and has more money to throw at this. Therefore the smaller audience will spend its last dime and still lose. It doesn’t make it right or fair, but it is predictable.
Hot debate. What do you think?
25 
16
I think it is interesting that we hear complaining from all those people South of Fargo but we haven’t really heard a peep from those North of Fargo (like Georgetown and all the overland flooding around the Harwood area). Then there is Louisanna. I have a sister living there in the path of the released water and she is currently packing up her house to leave. Her response to this is God will take care of us and as long as my family and I are safe is all that counts. Will her home be there once the flooding ends? She doesn’t know but she isn’t whining nor are her neighbors. Does she have money? No, she is 73 and works at Wal-Mart to make ends meet. I think she is a GRAND lady and I admire her attitude. There are lot out there that could learn a thing or two from her.
Hot debate. What do you think?
17 
18
Some might not be complaining from the North because they are too busy fighting water. My aunt and uncle in “North” West Fargo are still fighting water from the Sheyenne Diversion. I’m guessing (just a guess) that once all this water goes away and they have a little more time on their hands, there might be a few more from the north voicing their thoughts.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
21 
1
So, I was at the Oxbow “meeting”, which wasn’t even a meeting, because we did not have a quroum. What the heck is the Forum doing reporting on a diversion discussion that we had that was only just that: a discussion? Under the open meetings law, the reporter was allowed to be there. When it was realized we didn’t have a quroum, we should have asked the reporter to leave!! So much for fair reporting!
We talked more about the Corps report on fish and eagles and the Forum reports strategies we “may” be considering, such as delay tactics, etc.
This proposed diversion is so far in the tank on costs that are not yet covered that I cannot see how Congress will even come close to funding it, let alone Fargo and area residents accepting added specials assessments or more sales tax increases to pick up the $800M shortfall, because they are way way short folks! Also, people think this “silver bullet” diversion will prevent all future floods and do away with flood insurance needs. WRONG!!! (more money!)
The Corps can’t even manage the Baldhill Dam at Valley City, Garrison Dam, or the Devils Lake problem and are now blowing up flood protection levies on the Mississippi River. And you think they can do this abortion right?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
33 
9
Dear Fargo Residents,
I sure hope you have looked through the most recently released study, where the Corps has laid out in table format a year-by-year cost analysis throughout the construction period. The Fargo/Cass County share is generally in the 50-70 million per year for around 8-9 yrs. Guess how much is being brought in by your holy grail, the 1/2 cent sales taxes for Fargo and Cass? Combined they will bring around 21 million per year. Oops. Guess y’all are gonna be on the hook for the other 30-50 million EVERY YEAR. Have fun with that. I don’t suppose Denny or Captain America Mahoney have mentioned this publicly, have they? Can you say assessment?
Best of luck to the project sponsors, I’m sure you have an excellent chance of getting funding with a cost/benefit ratio that is weak at best, especially when the plan chosen has the worst ratio of any option by a significant margin.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
31 
7
Moorhead is being protected by this also, they should pay their fair share.
Like or Dislike:
11 
12
Their “fair share” is already factored into my numbers….their share is only 10% but now Fargo is pushing for the MN side to pay 20% (there is nothing in writing guaranteeing they will fork ANY money over)………
Like or Dislike:
14 
1
You can bet that rural cass is not looking forward to paying for this diversion a.k.a. flood control. Looking at the water levels today and the level of the water table in Ransom and Cass, this diversion will only make it worse for those living west, south, and north of Fargo. I read the article about Fargo’s new plan of building permanent dikes in today’s Forum. The same people who are concerned about losing their precious trees and lawn with the permanant dikes and want compensation are the same arrogant and ignorant people who will be upset when the rural citizens of Cass County complain that water is sitting on their “precious” fields. I truly hate that all of Cass County is stuck paying for Fargo’s diversion, when in the long run, it will only hurt those within Cass and outside of Fargo. I agree that Oxbow and all the outlying areas need to get together to fight this.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
27 
3
Oxbow isn’t alone. People in the rural areas from Kindred, Hickson, Bakke, Christine, Walcott, Colfax, Comstock, and beyond are organizing on this issue. Left out of the discussion on these pages so far is the fact that 33,390 of prime farmland would be in a “staging area” to be flooded when the diversion is operating. The Corps report acknowledges that land outside this area would be affected, but the impacts and costs have not yet been calculated. This isn’t your mother’s diversion–it’s a dam across the floor of the Red River Valley with a reservoir of 33,390 behind it. I-29 would become a huge causeway across a vast, depopulated wasteland. Before the taxpayers of Fargo-Moorhead take on this train wreck of a project, they need to know all the costs, risks, and implications of the plan.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
33 
4
Agree!!!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
17 
2