Matt Askegaard Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

Sometimes the needs of the few outweigh the perceived needs of the many. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is not onboard with the proposed project because it negatively impacts the environment of the state of Minnesota. The city of Fargo has made the choice to build in a flood plain. Why should their decision to do so negatively impact the surrounding farms and communities?

Continue Reading

Dave Gingrey Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

The diversion should be constructed within the city limits of Fargo. It is unethical to expect county residents outside the City of Fargo to sacrifice their property and livelihoods for the benefit of Fargo and it is unethical for the Army Corps of Engineers to be part of any such plan.

Continue Reading

Mary K. Adams Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

In an era of rapidly growing world population, demand for food will remain paramount. Rich farmland is a premium investment and is being sought and bought allover the world. So for me the question remains, is the diversion, as proposed, an undertaking for the economic development of south Fargo, or is it purely for flood protection?

Continue Reading

Richland Wilkin JPA (Joint Powers Agreement)

The Richland Wilkin JPA was formed in opposition to the Fargo Moorhead Dam and FM Diversion, wherein, Fargo, Cass County and the USACE propose to physically invade Richland and Wilkin counties with displaced flood water, in violation of EO 11988 from the natural flood plain adjacent to Fargo, ND. The Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion will unconstitutionally deprive property owners of all “economically viable” use of the land.

Continue Reading

If the North Dakota (LPP) removes additional land from the natural flood plain compared to the Minnesota (FCP) why is the USACE relying on Executive Order 11988 as an excuse to not consider the southern and western alignments?

<<< Return to FAQs >>> The USACE inconsistently applied EO 11988 as a result of “goal driven” findings pursuant to criteria set by the non-federal sponsor of Fargo, ND and Moorhead, MN. The current LPP ignores EO-11988 and relocates over 30+ square miles of natural flood plain for future development that benefits Fargo, ND while […]

Continue Reading

Beth Askegaard Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

<< Read and Download Original Beth Askegaard Comment Letter >> U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers: Upon attentive review of the proposed Fargo-Moorhead, “locally preferred” diversion plan, I have come to question not only the economical and environmental impacts that the plan imposes upon our region, but furthermore the ethical issues that will arise if this […]

Continue Reading

How can the project go all the way to Hickson, protecting undeveloped land, and be within the guidelines of EO11988?

The currently proposed LPP contained in the July 2011 (Sept 2011 release) directly and indirectly violates EO 11988. Over 200,000 acre feet of natural floodplain water south of the metro area will be displaced by Fargo, Cass County and the United States Army Corps of Engineers into areas that do not have a previous history of flooding.

Continue Reading

Keith and Jann Monson Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

Our farm and most of the land we farm lies on the inside of the proposed diversion. Despite that fact we are 100% against this diversion. Fargo has decided to build and continue to build to the south in lower flood prone areas that they now feel are the only way out of their bad city planning is to inflict this diversion debacle onto out lying areas without being willing to sacrifice anything within their city limits.

Continue Reading

What is the difference between retention, staging and storage?

<<< Return to FAQs >>> There are several similar terms employed by the USACE, Flood Diversion Board of Authority and media that create confusion with terms used by the Red River Basin Commission. Understanding the differences between the terms being used offers a greater understanding of the potential scope and deficiencies of the proposed Fargo […]

Continue Reading

Matt and Rachel Ness Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

We feel this project would be a gigantic mistake and waste of taxpayer dollars. The result of this project would take away my livelihood and devastate my farm and that has been in my family for four generations. The project will only benefit a small part ofthe Fargo/Moorhead area, while creating more water problems throughout the Red River Valley Basin area. There are too many holes in this current plan and too many foreseeable problems, this radical plan the Corps has planned is illogical.

Continue Reading