by Guy Page
Many Vermonters, including many VDC readers, have been urging dredging of Vermont rivers and streams and other means of reducing the likelihood of flood damage. VDC has been asking Scott administration officials about its plans for dredging in particular and about preventing and coping with future flood damage in general. Here’s what we’ve learned:
Dredging? Yes and No.
After last year’s flood, the State of Vermont issued about 400 dredging permits, most of them to remove debris at specific, high-risk flood areas. A few of these ‘prevent the next flood’ permits allowed dredging over thousands of feet of rivers, notably in Peacham and Williamstown. All the permits granted were implemented, ANR Secretary Julie Moore said in a conversation with VDC last week.
However, widespread dredging merely to increase the volume of the riverbed by deepening or widening it is not considered a wise anti-flood tactic, because it can inhibit desirable, upstream filling of traditional flood plain areas, and instead channels large amounts of fast-moving water into high density areas. This is particularly true of dredging rivers near or running through cities like Barre. One expert estimated the Stevens Brook would have to be dredged 100 ft. deep to prevent flooding the nearby, adjacent, high-density area.
Better use of existing flood control dams – but no new dams
Built in the New Deal 1930’s after the Great Flood of 1927, Vermont’s flood control dams on (for example) the Winooski, North Branch, and the Connecticut rivers are generally used in ‘passive’ mode for flood control. However, they have an ‘active’ mode in which sluices can be opened and closed, and state officials are speaking with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers experts about how best to maximize this aspect of dam control.
But it’s unlikely any new flood control dams will be built. Even in the 30’s the prospect of submerging neighborhoods to create an artificial lake was controversial.
VNRC-led dam removal not a risk, will continue
As reported in VDC this week, the Vermont Natural Resources Council (VNRC) is leading a dam removal program. To date 30 unused, obsolete small dams have been removed. ANR Secretary Julie Moore confirmed that the removal of these dams will have no negative impact on releasing heavier floodwaters downstream.
Town water/sewer bill now includes levy for flood repair $$
Did you notice that your stormwater bill went up? If so, it may be because the Flood Safety Act 143, passed this year, lets municipalities collect for anticipated flood repair (pg. 2). “Sewage system commissioners may now set stormwater rates for equivalent residential units based on an average area of impervious surface on residential property within the municipality. Revenues may be used for stormwater management, control, and treatment; flood resiliency; floodplain restoration; and other similar measures.”
The Flood Safety Act also directs the State to create new rules for wetlands, river corridor development, and dam safety. The rules will take at least three years to promulgate and more time may be needed, Gov. Scott has said. It also allows the State Treasurer to borrow against the state’s cash balance for mobile home park infrastructure projects.
Longterm planning for flood damage prevention
Act 121, also passed this year, requires the state to pass new regulations regarding community development in light of the increased flood hazard.
State of Vermont-administered, funded National Flood Insurance Program?
Act 121 also requires the State to consider administering and funding the National Flood Insurance Program (pg. 20), a FEMA program created by Congress in 1968 to provide an insurance alternative to disaster assistance to meet the escalating costs of repairing damage to buildings and their contents caused by floods.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: State Government, Weather
flood safety act 143//// i am paying 50.00 dollars per year fee for storm run off that never leaves my yard///
Maybe instead of virtue signaling us into poverty with dreams of electric heat & automobiles, the clowns in Congress could put some money toward surviving that which they deem inevitable. I mean, if you really think carbon causes global warming, and that tiny little Vermont’s carbon footprint erasure will even begin to compete with India, Indonesia & China’s contributions, you’re just an idiot.
Downed trees and other woody debris that have accumulated in rivers and waterways need to be removed. We actually used to do that. Unfortunately, scads of the tree huggers have infiltrated state agencies and lobbyists and have screeched that we must leave these trees, shrubs, logs and detritus as “natural habitat.” Look at the debris left behind by this recent events…debris that never should have been in or near the waterway in the first place. Yet another case of “save the salamander” but to hell with all the people that live in this state.
The reason given by the State is that removing the debris would allow for the more-rampant speeding up of both waters and the debris it carries, causing MORE damage. Not a bad point. But getting rid of the dams is nuts.
There is one significantly positive observation here – at least the conversation is finally considering alternatives to carbon emission pipe dreams.
The
The “expert” not named says Steven’s branch would have to be dredged 100′ ?
I’m curious on how that was calculated. A DPW guy told me storm drain pipes used to be 4 feet above normal water level a few decades ago. Now their at, below or slightly above water level. Decades of silt and debris with no mitigation upstream and downstream.
The FEMA flood maps have been around in each town since the late 60’s/early 70’s. Every town/city has a copy, and had one initially when they were first done. I was on a Selectboard back then, and I was impressed at the detail in which these maps were dotted with. Now as with time factors, things change. The most vulnerable municipalities were priority both in mapping and also getting flood ordinances passed, and just plain educating the public. Newer property owners may not have been fully informed about this Federal program.
Interestingly, there is a deliniation for the 500 yr flood. Maybe that is what we are in now. A call to Fema will be helpful if anyone wants to know about this work that has been in the governing hands for over a half century.
What will the State of Vermont do about future flooding, nothing !! just like it has done in the last century, their answer was, we didn’t think this would happen ” again”.
There are plenty of standards, to control waterways, be it a small brooks or a major river…….. Vermont and its tree-huggers, we can’t do that you may kill a fish, a toad, or a lizard or kill that plant, and they don’t care about you !!!
What will Vermont, beg FEMA for money for their incompetence?
I watch my road when it rains. The surface water runs down the street bypassing every storm drain on the road and heads right into the downtown area. The five storm drains within sight of my home remain dry and the street acts like a riverbed. Poor design.
Whoever is supposed to be finding a solution isn’t. But without total new management in our government, we will continue our keystone cop antics. There is the answer, stop voting the liberal democrats in. Vermont was paradise when the rarest thing was a democrat.
This is interesting, I wrote about dredging in important flooding areas about the time of the first flooding. A commenter said it would be too costly, really? Isn’t doing nothing expensive? The article and my comments are in the archives. I have a copy and can supply the link(s). Reality is coming through. Also dredging increases employment. and taxes for the state. I note this status is from a writer, not any one in Montpelier, too brain dead.
The folly of looking to the State of Vermont idiocracy to solve a problem – the results of their problem solving prowess, to date, is so stellar afterall!
Enjoyed seeing Peter Welch beg for money in an empty Senate chamber – “we must address this first thing in September.” Where is Peter, Becca and Bernie holidaying this August? The world, our country, and our State is decending into the darkest of times – good time for a taxpayer funded vacation!
Here’s your lawn sign, prop it up in your mud deluged yard, and vote for any meat puppet on the ballot, it will be tabulated according to the Master.