DNR's input essential in flood control

By RON LARSEN

Journal Staff Writer

NEW ULM -- As the discussion progressed Tuesday at the city council's informational meeting on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' proposal for a flood control feasibility study for t New Ulm, it became abundantly clear, particularly to Council President Dan Beranek, that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources needed to be a party to discussions about permanent flood control measures.

"I got a call Tuesday night from Dan in which he basically said we need to get together to discuss the situation," Dave Leuthe, regional hydrologist for the DNR in New Ulm, said Wednesday.

With the DNR having jurisdiction over the Minnesota River's flood plain, it was obvious to those attending the meeting that DNR input would be required.

Even James Mosner of the Corps' Project Management & Development Branch admitted the Corps would need permits from the state in order to build any kind of permanent flood control apparatus along the river.

"We will need to be sure that what is done in New Ulm doesn't conflict with the interests of others on the river," Leuthe explained. "Flood control measures restrict the river's flow, raising the water level upstream so the DNR has to be sure that what is done for some people doesn't hurt others."

Because the flood plain's boundaries are not a constant, the issue becomes more clouded.

The limits of the flood plain on either side of the river are determined by a statistical analysis by the Federal Emergency Management Agency in which the edge of the flood plain is determined by the level that flood water will exceed 1 percent of the time over a 100-year period.

"The problem is that we do not have 100 years' worth of actual data to use in making that determination, nor do we have 300 years of data to make it even more reliable," Leuthe said. "We certainly are willing to work with the community in an attempt to solve their problems, as we're now doing in Granite Falls."

The problem is, according to Leuthe, that there are "technical questions" about New Ulm's flood control situation that need to be answered.

"From 20th South to 14th South, there is still room to maneuver," Leuthe said. "However, as you go farther upstream, from 11th on, they are already at the maximum limit for squeezing the flood plain. They've taken all the encroachments that are allowed."

Whereas the Corps is looking at installation of permanent flood control diking as a remedy for New Ulm, Leuthe said the DNR would encourage the city "to be looking at something more restrictive" in terms of limiting residential and industrial development along the river.

"We would consider acquisition and buyouts as a long-term solution to this problem," Leuthe said. "We know we will continue to get floods, and if we're looking at minimizing the amount of pain and damage when it comes to serious flooding, it is perhaps better to remove and relocate than to attempt to protect the property with dikes.

"With what we have seen in 1997 and now in 2001, water levels are going higher than ever," Leuthe explained. "Even if a permanent dike were to be built, it may be too low to contain future floods. Then the city would be in a position of trying to add height to the berm with addition of sandbags and soil. Parts of it could give way, and lives could be lost in the attempt to raise the height of the berm.

"What the DNR is looking for is a win-win situation in which those on or near the flood plain are urged to relocate and get away from it, letting the river run its course," Leuthe said.

"We realize it's nice to live close to a river," he added, "but that may not be a practical decision, considering the high water we've had in recent floods."

Obviously, the Corps of Engineers is all about building things, whether it be locks and dams or dikes, so that puts Corps' philosophy squarely at odds with the DNR's philosophy.

As Mosner noted, the Corps must get the DNR's approval to do anything to the river.