Lawsuit- AR farmers vs COE

[Quillback]

Saw in yesterdays' paper that farmers that farm along the lower White river are filing a lawsuit against the COE.  They are claiming the COE changed it's water management policies to favor recreational use instead of focusing solely on flood management.  The farmers have been flooded out several times over the last decade or so and are suing to get paid for loss of crops caused by flood damage.  

That's a basic summation of what I read.  Don't know if this will lead to changes in the way the COE releases water in the future.

[Daryk Campbell Sr]

58 minutes ago, Quillback said:

Saw in yesterdays' paper that farmers that farm along the lower White river are filing a lawsuit against the COE.  They are claiming the COE changed it's water management policies to favor recreational use instead of focusing solely on flood management.  The farmers have been flooded out several times over the last decade or so and are suing to get paid for loss of crops caused by flood damage.  

That's a basic summation of what I read.  Don't know if this will lead to changes in the way the COE releases water in the future.

I didn't learn much about the full crop insurance program, as I don't sell that.  But, I would believe the farmers would be covered for loss of crops in that instance.  I know that doesn't cover the farmer who decides to opt out of that coverage,  and suffers a loss.  Just my first thoughts.  

[tjm]

As soon as they put generators in those dams they were no longer about flood  control.

[jdmidwest]

7 hours ago, Daryk Campbell Sr said:

I didn't learn much about the full crop insurance program, as I don't sell that.  But, I would believe the farmers would be covered for loss of crops in that instance.  I know that doesn't cover the farmer who decides to opt out of that coverage,  and suffers a loss.  Just my first thoughts.  

Insurance costs money.  And  insurance companies are in it to make money.  I am sure the risk guys see what is going on and rates will rise costing the farmers more money.  Either way, farmers are at a loss.  Tax payer dollars spent on flood control and its not happening. 

 

[Terrierman]

Competing interests.  That's what the courts are for.  Who's in this one for the recreational use side?

[Daryk Campbell Sr]

1 hour ago, jdmidwest said:

Insurance costs money.  And  insurance companies are in it to make money.  I am sure the risk guys see what is going on and rates will rise costing the farmers more money.  Either way, farmers are at a loss.  Tax payer dollars spent on flood control and its not happening. 

 

Yup.  The worst part of this circle, is crop insurance is gov't funded, and regulated.  So is flood insurance.  The insurance companies have no control over pricing, and regulations.  Every company will offer the exact same product(s).   Nothing more, nothing less.  The difference is claim quality and speed. 

[Quillback]

9 hours ago, Terrierman said:

Competing interests.  That's what the courts are for.  Who's in this one for the recreational use side?

Didn't see anyone on the rec use side, at least the article didn't mention anyone.

 

[tjm]

They are saying that the COE  did manage the flooding for many years by lowering the pool in winter at a time when the flooding didn't hurt the crops, but, changed that policy so that now the flooding is in spring ruining crops or preventing working the fields. Framers have a pretty good case looks like but USACE has very deep pockets.  Think settlement and ongoing compensation, while the farmer changes use of land to pasture/hay rather than tilled crops.

Quote

It says that in order to provide "the highest quality, year-round public recreation," the Corps changed its practices "despite knowing that the direct, natural, probable and foreseeable result of that departure would be increasingly frequent, prolonged, and severe flooding" of the plaintiffs' property....
The change, the suit says, "was part of a multi-year process to appropriate a benefit for the public; namely, to increase quality year-round recreation within the River System's reservoirs and tail waters, and to preserve wetlands in the Basin."....
The suit cites findings from the University of Arkansas' Agriculture Division that flooding in 2011 resulted in about $335 million in flood damage to Arkansas farmers, while 2016 flooding caused an estimated $50 million in damage, and flooding in early 2017 caused an estimated $175 million in damage, as well as adversely affecting farming operations on nearly 1 million acres.

 

[fishinwrench]

Dam operators always "prepare for spring floods" but there aren't anymore Spring floods than there are Winter, Fall, and Summer floods.

They aren't preparing for Spring floods, they are using up water during increased power generation times.....but saying that they are "drawing down in preparation for FLOODS" makes them sound all kind and caring.   🙄

[tjm]

 

17 hours ago, fishinwrench said:

Dam operators always "prepare for spring floods" but there aren't anymore Spring floods than there are Winter, Fall, and Summer floods.

They aren't preparing for Spring floods, they are using up water during increased power generation times.....but saying that they are "drawing down in preparation for FLOODS" makes them sound all kind and caring.   🙄

I reckon they should keep should the pool low enough that it could take 16" rain at any time, if it's a flood control dam it should never ever pass on more than average water down stream. Flood control is a myth, propaganda used to get people to authorize public owned power supplies. Those dams were never meant for anything  except hydro electric subsidy.