Sunday, January 11, 2009

Water water everywhere

The flood of 07


The flood of 09


I've lived in this part of the country for about 30 years. Back in the early 1990s was the first really large flood we had in the area. It was confined to a northern county and took a couple of weeks to clean up. So what happened in the last 20 odd years that made things worse. One word - Politics. The state installed a republican head of land management. A man who sided totally with business and permitted clear cutting of forests above populated areas. The river management wasn't too good either. Rivers that were once dredged during the summer were left. The result. Two years of flooding, landslides and destroyed homes. Some of the people in the southwestern part of the state are finished. They had just finished rebuilding their homes from the 07 flooding only to be wiped out again. As one resident put it " everybody on the street is broke there's no way they can rebuild now."
Now if sombody would get smart and look at was once done and increase some of the local levys, dredge the rivers and plant more trees in sensitive areas these types of floods would go back to being of the hundred year events.

4 comments:

BBC said...

Is that right? Okay, I'll take your word for it. Flooding here wasn't too bad, mostly just in spots that they have been dealing with it for many years.

It flooded under a mall on the waterfront last week but that area is a landfill anyway. Someday if a good quake hits here it will all be history anyway.

Along with the hospital that these idiots built on the bluff over the bay. Face it pal, we're surrounded by fucking idiots.

MRMacrum said...

People whine and complain about how Maine is so anti-business what with all the enviromental and anti growth regulations we have put in place over the last 40 years. That these regulations have had a detrimental affect on our economy. Yeah, they probably have. But I will say this. Because of those rules, Atlantic Salmon are coming back to spawn. Many lakes are clean enough to drink out of. And the woods as a rule do not get so thrashed now when tree harvesting happens. We may be poor and have a high tax rate, but we have a state that is right pleasant to be poor in. Beats being poor next to a landfill or 10,000 unit spread of condos and golf courses that litter the landscape other places.

People have to decide what they want. Growth means compromises have to be made against the needs of the enviroment they want that growth in. You cannot have both without serious considerations and slow deliberate action. Unfortunately, states/regions tend to knee jerk bad policy through in order to relieve pressures from increases in populations and to help draw business to their area. When everything is slanted in favor of a hot economy, something else has to suffer.

Floods are never good. But more often than not, the damage done to manmade things is a result of poor foresight and lousy execution of whatever was in the way of the water.

BBC said...

Right, I have no problem with being poor as long as there is no more growth.

It would make me happy if half of the people left this area, especially those idiots that have came here in the last ten years with all their stupid big plans.

dana wyzard said...

Demeur, uh, is it your AIM to play to the audience? If so, Mr Macrum is a nice guy and I'm here too, so your class C rating has gone up to B-. I was at Blog Fodders today and saw your head's up.

Since I prefer animals to humankind, when humans evacuate their flooded city, why do they always leave the faithful dog chained to the doghouse?