Cairo Vs. Mississippi County

[flytyer57]

It's true Cairo wouldn't exist without the levees, it's also true the farmland wouldn't exist without the levees, or the ditches and diversions constructed in the southeast Lowlands in the early 1900's. It's a moot point.

We have to do the best with the cards we're dealt, and to me it seems flooding cropland in Missouri would be a better bet than flooding homes in Illinois.

I think people should deal with what they got and not put it onto other people.

If the levee around Cairo isn't high enough to hold back the water there, then they should have built it higher.

[hank franklin]

Ah if the world were only all apples to apples. If your house was protected by levees on all sides and meanwhile was near falling down, and the vacant lot across the street wasn't vacant but had a nice accessory building on it with a few odds and ends, and the best the flooding that lot would get me was a couple days reprieve and ya know, MAYBE I'd survive this flood but if I did the feds may come calling anyway saying ya know, either pay more flood insurance buddy or move to higher ground, well then eventually if not today or this year then maybe next, I'm gonna be on higher ground.

Cairo's existence is at odds with the National Flood Insurance Program. The Corps has built the levees as best they can. Ride it out, and good luck.

[ColdWaterFshr]

Haven't read any of the arguments, but ALL levees should go, on all rivers. You build too close, you shouldn't be given flood insurance or any other kind of guarantee, government assistance or otherwise. One of these days we'll wake up.

[jdmidwest]

Haven't read any of the arguments, but ALL levees should go, on all rivers. You build too close, you shouldn't be given flood insurance or any other kind of guarantee, government assistance or otherwise. One of these days we'll wake up.

Like I stated, those in the flood plain have profited for years off the benefits of the levee system. The levee was only engineered to hold back "x" amount of water and we have exceeded that amount. It is not just Cairo, but many towns along the east bank of KY too, like Hickman.

[ColdWaterFshr]

Like I stated, those in the flood plain have profited for years off the benefits of the levee system. The levee was only engineered to hold back "x" amount of water and we have exceeded that amount. It is not just Cairo, but many towns along the east bank of KY too, like Hickman.

And not just there, but all up and down ANY major river system. For every vertical inch of levee built, somewhere, just downstream or even straight across or even slightly upstream, the river pressure just grew that much more for all of those people. Its simple friggin lesson a 3rd grader can understand if explained clearly enough. I can see how the Gov't is stupid enough to fall for it, but I'm still amazed that big business - major insurance in particular, hasn't seemed to grasp it or get a handle on the risk assessment. Cairo - you don't deserve flood insurance, simple as that! You too, New Orleans, Grafton, Quincy, and on and on and on. Its time the government got out of the levee building business. We're paying to build them, then for the loss when they fail, and now we're paying to blow them up and also for the loss caused by blowing them up?

If the courts say this small Missouri levee should go, then so should ALL the rest on the whole river corridor.

[Gavin]

Easy call...people v. corn....people win.

[Outside Bend]

Haven't read any of the arguments, but ALL levees should go, on all rivers. You build too close, you shouldn't be given flood insurance or any other kind of guarantee, government assistance or otherwise. One of these days we'll wake up.

I definitely agree that curbing development in floodplains, and relocated people where possible, is the ideal long-term solution. In the meantime, someone has to decide whether saving thousands of homes is worth inundating hundreds of thousands of acres, and eliminating some folks' livelihoods for some time.

I wonder if some arrangement could be made- communities "protected" by levees pay farmers for floodwater storage?

[flytyer57]

Would you go along with a plan to flood and destroy your home and belongings in order to save the vacant lot across the street?

But the lot next door ain't vacant. There are thousands of acres of good crop land, most of which have already been planted, and as many as 100 homes.

[flytyer57]

Cairo's existence is at odds with the National Flood Insurance Program. The Corps has built the levees as best they can. Ride it out, and good luck.

Exactly.

And leave everybody else alone in the process.

[Outside Bend]

Cairo's existence is at odds with the National Flood Insurance Program.

And you can make the exact same argument about the farmers on the other side of the river- as I said earlier, it's a moot point. Why should Cairo get the shaft because both parties built their homes and businesses in equally bad places?

If the levee around Cairo isn't high enough to hold back the water there, then they should have built it higher.

The Corps has built the levees as best they can. Ride it out, and good luck.

If a question of design, the answer's easy. The Cairo levee was designed to hold back X feet of water. The Missouri levee was designed to be blown in the event the Cairo levee was in danger of failing. If the MO levee was designed to be blown, why not blow it?