My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD05913
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
5001-6000
>
FLOOD05913
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 7:07:18 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 1:52:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Statewide
Basin
Statewide
Title
Report of the Floodplain Management Forum
Date
6/8/2000
Prepared For
U.S
Prepared By
FEMA
Floodplain - Doc Type
Floodplain Report/Masterplan
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
138
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />. CRS credits should be given for enforcing, not just having, local ordinances. <br /> <br />. Floodplain management should not just be about flood insurance but also about managing <br />natural resources. <br /> <br />Mr. Sheqffer pointed out that economic analyses for rate establishment need to include benefits <br />to the natural resources. <br /> <br />Mr. Oshida supported Dr. White's comments on watershed planning; there needs to be more <br />integration among Federal agencies to do watershed-level planning and education. <br /> <br />Mr. Ellegood urged caution in mixing environmental and public safety issues in the same <br />program. The motivation for the policy and the mission of the regulating agency must be clear to <br />all concerned. <br /> <br />Mr. Hulsey countered that constituency groups also have mixed needs and that combined voices <br />send a stronger message than single-issue voices. He also pointed out that important water <br />management agencies were not represented at this Forum: National Resource Conservation <br />Service, especially the Emergency Watershed Protection Program, and the U.S. Fish and <br />Wildlife Service. <br /> <br />Mr. Kusler agreed that collecting better community-based water and related risk information is <br />very important and that FEMA is the leader in this field. Communities and developers need to <br />be provided with incentives to do more detailed studies. <br /> <br />Ms. Cameron said that integrated planning and implementation are very hard to do, but gathering <br />many more stakeholders around the table ultimately leads to a better situation. It is impossible to <br />manage one aspect of a watershed without affecting other aspects. She also stated that the <br />reconnaissance and feasibility studies done for the Corps, which required congressional approval <br />for implementation, was the most difficult and time-consuming process ever experienced. <br /> <br />Wrap-Up <br /> <br />Mr. Armstrong thanked everyone for coming and participating in this Forum and for having the <br />courage to say what has been said. He praised the entire community in moving forward on the <br />education of citizens on the messages of risk reduction, prevention and mitigation, and <br />floodplain management. Mr. Witt wants to leave a forward-moving governance legacy for future <br />administrations. <br /> <br />Mr. Armstrong outlined some of the key themes that he had heard: <br /> <br />A. Mapping <br /> <br />. The 100-year floodplain standard needs to be revised. <br />. Other threats, such as levee failure, should be incorporated. <br />. Adjustments should be made for anticipated maximum future growth. <br /> <br />Floodplain Management Forum <br /> <br />38 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.