by Jamee Larson

In 2009, the Red River Valley experienced the second highest flood on record as the river swelled to 40.8 feet; a level over twice that of its eighteen foot flood stage. The area may have experienced a catastrophic event if not for the tireless efforts of its residents, who placed over three million sandbags along the river. Over the past few years, the term “sandbagging” has become synonymous with spring, something the F-M Diversion Authority would like to change. After a three-year study by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, it is their recommendation that “a diversion channel with upstream storage is required to provide the F-M area with protection from large events and not cause downstream impact.”

What is staging and storing?

In order to eliminate downstream impact, upstage staging and storing of approximately 200,000 acre-feet immediately upstream of the diversion channel inlet would be required. Staging and storage refers to the water containment adjacent to the F-M Diversion. According to the Corps of Engineers, storage is most effective when placed upstream and close to the area being protected, which in this case is the F-M metro area. The F-M Metro Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement states, “The further away storage is located from Fargo-Moorhead, the less effective and reliable it becomes and the smaller the benefits.” The proposed staging and storing area is a 4,360 acre area on the north side of the diversion channel between the Wild Rice River and Sheyenne River and will be formed by nearly twelve miles of embankments and provide 50,000 acre-feet of storage.

What is the negative impact of the F-M Diversion Project?

The staging and storage area aspect of the project, although beneficial to the F-M metro area, would have adverse effects on the upstream communities, particularly in the Oxbow, Hickson, and Bakke Subdivision region. According to Perry Miller of the Richland-Wilkin Joint Powers Authority, “the diversion channel is not the issue, but the dams which create a permanent economic ‘dead zone’ of approximately 54,000 acres are. Many acres would need to be sold by landowners and farmers who do not want to sell or give up their way of life.”

Marcus Larson, a homeowner in the Bakke Subdivision, is among those affected. “It would destroy it completely,” he said when asked how the proposed diversion would impact his community. Marcus and his wife moved south of the metro area because they wanted to “get away from the chatter of Fargo.” They bought their home in 1995 because it was not on a floodplain, and spent the better part of five years restoring it. His property is also home to almost 400 apple, apricot, and choke cherry trees. “How can I possibly be compensated?” he asked. “We put our soul into this house.”

The Kindred School district would also be affected. “The district would lose about 25% of its taxable valuation under the current proposal,” said Perry Miller, “creating an economic disaster for a vibrant and growing school and community.”

Both Miller and Larson echoed the same sentiment regarding flood protection for the metro area. “We want to see Fargo receive permanent flood protection,” said Miller. He believes that “Fargo should use its own land to store water, not the land south of the Fargo School District that had nothing to do with creating the problem of developing in flood prone areas and near the river.”

What are the alternatives to the Diversion Project?

The F-M Diversion Authority and the Corps of Engineers studied a variety of alternative solutions to reduce flood risk in the entire metropolitan and surrounding area. Those alternatives include:

– Taking no action and continuing emergency measures

– Implementing non-structural measures

– Constructing flood barriers (including levees)

– Utilizing increased conveyance (including diversion channels)

– Creating flood storage areas

It was after comparing the overall cost to the anticipated effectiveness that the Diversion Authority decided upon the current proposal. The Richland-Wilkin Joint Power Authority would recommend running more water through the river channel and moving the diversion inlet north of where the Wild Rice meets the Red River. To date, that option is not being considered. Those opposed to the project are far from giving in, however. “I don’t think they understand the resolve of the people south of them to prevent destruction of our communities, future development and way of life, just so Fargo can develop in the natural floodplain,” Miller said.

What About a Ring Dike for the Upstream Communities?

The Diversion Authority is currently considering a proposal to build a ring dike to protect the communities of Oxbow, Hickson and Bakke from water that would be stored upstream. The proposed ring would range in height from nine to twelve feet, with the exception of the reach crossing the golf course, which would be higher. Highway 81 would be raised to provide access over the dike. The communities within the dike could see as much as eight feet of water surrounding them.

The ring dike would reduce the number of home buyouts needed to complete the Diversion Project. Those not interested in living within the dike would not, however, be compensated. According to the Diversion Authority, “acquisitions of property in fee title would be limited to those properties directly impacted by the levee or those properties that would remain in the staging area. The remaining properties within the ring levees would be provided flood risk reduction benefits and would not require a buyout according to USACE policy.” For homeowners like Marcus Larson, that means looking out his window at a man-made structure as opposed to the six miles of open plains that he currently enjoys.

The Diversion Project has definite benefits and obvious drawbacks. Those adversely affected have been forced into a state of limbo. “It wears on people,” said Larson, “there is a constant threat being placed upon you.” His plans of retiring in a couple of years have been placed on hold due to the uncertainty of his future. “They are taking our property for their benefit at our expense,” he said. It is clear, however, that he is not willing to go down without a fight.

For more information on the opposition, go to www.fmdam.org or www.mndakupstreamcoalition.com.