Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Damages were principally to agricultural land and crops and to public infrastructure. <br />Through flood hazard mitigation work following the floods of ]983 and 1984 and the high runoff <br />of 1993, through preparations undertaken primarily by state and local governmental agencies <br />during May, June and July of 1995, through extensive media coverage of the flood threat, and <br />through a lot of LUCK, serious damages were avoided. There were twenty-one lives lost, but <br />they were all a result of water recreationists failing to take proper precautions rather than <br />travellers and building occupants being caught by flooding. <br /> <br />Since the flood event of 1993, the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) has <br />increased its snowpack monitoring efforts. The experience with snowpack monitoring that was <br />acquired in ] 993 proved very useful in 1995. Interestingly enough, at the start of the 1995 <br />snowpack monitoring effort, the state's snowpack, which had actually been below average until <br />then, kept increasing at precisely the time when it actually should have been decreasing (late <br />April and early May). As a result, the CWCB moved into action and formed the state's first <br />Flood Task Force. The Task Force brought state and federal agencies, private entities and the <br />media together on a weekly basis for 8 weeks so they could collectively share information about <br />flood conditions and about their responses to those conditions. The Task Force's actions <br />positively influenced the way governmental agencies respond to floods and how the public <br />perceives them. <br /> <br />; <br /> <br />Statewide awareness of "Flood Threat 95" provided potential flood vlcttms with <br />opportunities to implement flood mitigation and preparedness measures. Through the efforts of <br />the Colorado Flood Task Force, weekly forecasts were provided to the state's emergency and <br />floodplain managers as well as the news media. <br /> <br />These forecasts were developed and prepared from real time data gathered from its 14- <br />member agencies. The CWCB developed computerized planning tools for flood forecasting that <br />gave state and local officials some ability to anticipate flood peaks and respond accordingly. The <br />CWCB staff developed snowmelt flood forecast tools which utilized temperature and snowpack <br />water equivalent to estimate runoff at 10 selected locations. These computerized tools proved <br />useful in monitoring and identifying "hot spots" across the state's river basins. At this point the <br />state's ability to predict the magnitude and timing of snowmelt flood peaks is not as well refined <br />as many local officials would like. In a few locations the peak was overestimated or <br />underestimated and/or the timing of the peak was different than what was predicted. By and <br />large, in 1995 officials had more advance warning of the flood peaks that they could expect than <br />they had ever had before. <br /> <br />When the flooding was over, the state visited the flooded communities to hold local flood <br />hazard mitigation planning meetings. At these meetings, all of the counties and municipalities <br />in a particular watershed were invited to consider preparing plans to identify problems <br />experienced in 1995 and to develop strategies for reducing damages and inconvenience the next <br />time similar flooding occurs. It is hoped that the Flood Event of 1995 will prompt some of <br />Colorado's communities to make changes that will make them even better prepared the next time <br />rain and/or snow bring more flooding. <br /> <br />~ <br />