Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Berm rehabilitation in the specific Problem Areas is discussed below. <br /> <br />Problem Area 3. This area would require approximately l,300 cubic yards (cu. yd.) of <br />material placement to contain the 3,000 cfs discharge. Five sections of berms would be needed <br />at a total length of approximately 8,300 feet. Berm heights would range from l.l to 2.4 feet. <br /> <br />Problem Area 4. This area would require approximately 2,200 cu. yd. of material <br />placement to contain the 3,000 cfs discharge. One section of berm would be needed at a total <br />length of approximately 2,700 ft. Berm heights would range from 0.9 to 4.3 feet. <br /> <br />Problem Area 5. No improvements are required for this area to pass the 3,000 cfs <br />discharge. <br /> <br />Problem Area 6. This area would require approximately 800 cu. yd. of material <br />placement to contain the 3,000 cfs discharge. Two sections of berms would be needed at a <br />total length of approximately 2,200 feet. Berm heights would range from 1.8 to 2.9 feet. <br /> <br />Problem Area 7. This area would require approximately 200 cubic yards (cu. yd.) of <br />material placement to contain the 3,000 cfs discharge. Two sections of berms would be needed <br />at a total length of approximately 2,000 feet. Berm heights would range from 1.1 to 1.3 feet. <br /> <br />Non-structural Alternative: Conservation and Restoration <br /> <br />A non-structural solution to surface-water (and, in some cases, groundwater) inundation <br />of agricultural areas is to return them to the floodplain through conversion from crop <br />production to pasture or native riparian vegetation. As stated previously, many ofthe affected <br />areas were brought into production within the last 40 years and, therefore, are likely only <br />marginally suitable as cropland due to soil wetness. Because these areas are level and lack <br />woody vegetation, the establishment of pasture or riparian vegetation would be fairly <br />straightforward. Typical vegetation restoration techniques are discussed in detail in Section <br />4.4. <br /> <br />Because the subject areas are privately owned, implementation of this alternative <br />would, of course, be dependent on landowner willingness. Landowners may individually <br />pursue this objective. If restoration is to be conducted by a government agency or conservation <br />organization, compensation to the landowner for retirement of land from production would <br />likely be required. Estates could include fee purchase or some form of conservation easement. <br />The latter likely would include monetary compensation to the landowner for relinquishing the <br />right to develop the area as cropland; all other rights and uses would be retained by the <br />landowner. For instance, the landowner could utilize the area as pasture or lease it for hunting. <br /> <br />This conservation/restoration alternative could be implemented through the Corps of <br />Engineers' Section 1135 authority. A non-Federal entity or conservation organization would be <br />required to serve as the local sponsor of the project, provide 25% of the planning and <br />implementation costs, and hold title to any real estate purchase or easements agreements. (See <br /> <br />39 <br />