Gene Sauvageau Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

<< Read and Download Original Gene Sauvageau Comment Letter >> The Fargo Dam & Diversion Project is bad for hundreds of people and many surrounding communities’ on the Red River Basin. Water detention is a much better system for every body and the land and “Fargo”. My farmstead value is worthless right now, No improvements […]

Continue Reading

Brenda Sauvageau Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

<< Read and Download Original Brenda Sauvageau Comment Letter >> Fargo Dam and Diversion, Our immediate family has lived here for over a quarter of a century. We reside in a home which we moved onto our land eight years ago. Our seventeen year old daughter has lived with us here her whole life. If […]

Continue Reading

Seeking Answers: My F-M diversion quest

Kudos are in order for Kristin Kirtz of MSUM. Through the eyes of a wayward college student and aspiring journalist, she’s captured a portion of the uncertainty and indifference that many feel as the proposed project silently overwhelms better senses. More curious is Kristin Kirtz’s corroboration of a behavioral defect that should have more people […]

Continue Reading

Why are upstream impacts rather than downstream impacts being proposed?

<<< Return to FAQs >>> Short answer, to benefit Fargo’s future plans for economic development. Excerpt from USACE FEIS Appendix C 3.9 Project Performance, Risk and Uncertainty Given the uncertainty associated with the various hydraulic, hydrologic, and economic relationships used in the flood damage analysis, there is likewise some uncertainty regarding a project’s ability to […]

Continue Reading

Jean Anderson Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

The impact and importance of cultural and community heritage should be valued with the same weight as other economic values. If the diversion project proceeds, please confirm, with historical examples, what federal law means by: “each affected parcel will be appraised and assessed for impact: as a way to determine what “just compensation” might be”.

Continue Reading

Will the Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion remove flood insurance requirements?

<<< Return to FAQs >>> Dropping flood insurance coverage downstream of any high risk – high hazard dam is a personal choice that exposes financial lenders and property owner to significant risk. The American Society of Civil Engineers issued a GRADE D in 2009 for dam structures in the United States. “As dams age and […]

Continue Reading

Is the proposed diversion LPP considered a “high hazard” dam?

<<< Return to FAQs >>> Yes, according to FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) and Minnesota DNR guidelines, the Fargo Moorhead Dam and FM Diversion is considered a high risk or high hazard potential dam which includes: • probable loss of life or serious hazard, or • damage to health, • damage to main highways, • […]

Continue Reading

Marcus Larson Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

The USACE previous responses to Violations of EO11988 are insufficient. This suggests a conflict of interest and lack of representation to affected taxpayers and areas outside the protected area. Darrell Vanyo’s testimony is self-evident that Fargo is pursuing this project for future flood plain development which is a direct violation of EO11988. 43 feet of protection in Fargo is a game changer and all previous cost benefit ratios are no longer valid.

Continue Reading

Wayne and Lori Rheault Comments to the USACE re: Fargo Moorhead Dam and Diversion

<< Read and Download Original Wayne & Lori Rheault Comment Letter >> To the army corps of engineers; We would like to address this Fargo diversion/dam, we live just south of Fargo in Hickson an area that has never been flooded. Our concerns are that you are going to sacrifice our area to save a […]

Continue Reading