FLOOD09107 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Figure 2 - Timelineofprimaf)'f1oodp/ain and natural resource management efforts in the United Stales. The Frontier Era Pre-19t7 Limited federal in~.ulvement in floodeuntrolorrelicf. The Structural Era 1917 Federal Flood ConlrOl AcK In response to flood disasters in many areas ufthe country, the federal government took on the costs ofconstnJcting reservoirs, channels, dams, and levees. The A.rmy Corps of Engineers was responsible for these efforts. Thi~ type of flood conlrOh are referred toas"stnJcturalcontrols." 1928 1936 1938 1950 Federal Disaster Act provided rehefto flood victims. The Stewardship Era 1960 Flood Control Ac\. Corps of Engineers assists communities in planning uses of floodplains. 1965 Water Resources Planning Act combined federal and state efforts in creating river basin commissions to do comprehen- sive planning. Unified f\ational 1966 Program for Managing Flood Losses sought to combine federal, state, and local efforts for comprehensi~.e floodplain management. Evolving over several decades. this program attempted to discourage unwise development and to provide education about strategies and 10015 for managing floodplains. 1968 National Flood Insurance Act made flood insurance available to homeowners in communities that have implemented local floodplain management regulations. Kational Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. 1969 :\"ational Environmental Policy Act required broad consider- atiun of environmental impacts hefore implementation of federally funded projects. 1972 Water Pollution Control Act Amendments and Clean Water 1977 Act establish a pennitting system for development in wetlands. 1977 Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management Water Resources Development Act made provisions for cost sharing in water projects. Omnibus Water Bill requires Corps of Engineers to consider environmental protection as one of its primary missions, and encourages the protection of wetlands; Stafford Disasler ReliefAet. 1986 1990 1994 National Flood Insurance RefunnAct Despite the fact that the hydrology. vegetation, wildlife, and soils in floodplains are intri- cately connected to one another, agency programs were often designed to deal only with single aspects of floodplains, such as flood control or erosion. This single-purpose approach to management has been limiting because it did not recognize the complexity of these sys- tems and the interdependent componenL"i of natural areas, As the connections between net- works of streams and rivers, adjacent wetlands, soils, vegetation, wildlife, and people are increasingly understood, many experts have begun to encourage "multiobjective manage- ment" of river and stream corridors. This shift in approach is reflected in the time line, which shows the parallel histories of floodplain and natural resource management as each has moved toward more broad-based, comprehensive management efforts. From the birth of the United States until the early 1900s. many federal policies and programs encouraged the development of land, a plentiful resource in a continually expanding nation. In this period, which might be classified as the Frontier Era, the common goal was to con. quer the \\.'ild landscape of the young nation and to promote "productive use" of land. Flood hazards were the problem of the individual property owner or were dealt with cooperatively at the local level. As the land became more populated and developed during the first half of the twentieth century, federal and state governments began to set aside natural areas for protection. Such legislative actions were useful, but they treated natural areas as discrete parcels and lacked appreciation for the interconnectedness between preserved areas and the surrounding land. At the same time, in response to a series of devastating flood disasters throughout the coun- try, the federal government began to take an active role in preventing flood losses by assum- ing costs for the construction of structures such as dams and levees for flood control. This period. known as the Structural Era, was characterized by attempts to alter and control flood- waters and get water off the land as quickly as possible. In the 1960s and 1970s. however, the complexity and interconnectedness of natural systems triggered in resource managers a new respect for the multiple values of natural areas. Federal agencies that had traditionally operated under single-purpose directives were charged with broadened mandates, such as considering the effects of timber man- agement practices on water quality and wildlife. These shifts in policy heralded an Era of Stewardship for natural systems. Also during this period, despite impressive flood control engineering feats, flood losses continued to rise. In response, federal disaster relief programs were created to deal with the reality of ongoing flood losses throughout the country, and others, such as the National Flood Insurance Program, encouraged appropriate development of flood hazard areas. More recently, the lessons of natural resource stewardship have begun to influence our thinking about floodplain manage- ment, and as we realize not only the limitations of our ability to control flooding, we also realize the tremendous benefits that naturally functioning floodplain systems can offer. This realization is responsible for the shift to managing floodplains for multiple objectives. There are three stories running through this brief history of floodplain management in the U.S.. The first is the story of our evolving understanding of the complexity of natu- ral resource functions. The second is our recognition of limitations on our ability to control floods. And the third - perhaps the most important - is the story of shifting responsibility. Although the burden of flood hazard protection was accepted by the fed- eral government earlier in this century, we have come to recognize that the most sen- sible, least costly approach to flood hazard protection may have less to do with dams and disaster relief, and more to do with land-use patterns within floodplains. In the U.S., most land-use decisions are made at the local level. This means that there must not only be a renewed emphasis on community responsibility for preventing flood losses, but also for stewardship of the valuable natural functions associated \\"ith floodplains, -