Please abandon the Fargo Diversion project and come up with a better plan that doesn’t cause so much devastation to the environment and to the few THOUSAND of us who are the path of the monstrosity.
There are moral issues and economic issues with your project which will have long term adverse effects on the community.
I know you are engineers and not particularly concerned with such things, but I appeal to your sense of humanity that you go back to the drawing board, and propose a plan that protects the environment and the people who are having this problem shoved into their lap.
please read the next page.
David A. Ness
P.S. It is insensitive to send out letters demanding access to someone’s land FOREVER and then to tell those same people they better get ready to go to court if they don’t cooperate.
< Next Page>
It looks like a done deal. With the politicians all on board and pushing forward, the Fargo Dam steamroller appears unstoppable!! Fargo can develop! But wait. Who is going to address the moral problem? Or will it ever be addressed at all? What could be immoral about it?
The Fargo dam project as put forth by the Corp of Engineers has a moral problem in both environmental and human terms which will leave behind a legacy of acrimony. Sure, Fargo needs to be dry, but maybe there’s a better, less destructive, less costly way it can be accomplished. And why haven’t alternatives been publicly discussed?
|# 1||I grew up in Moorhead when it was a town that recognized the Golden Rule, and I went to the same church as Mark Voxland and Morrie Lanning. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” There are a few THOUSAND people who live on farms and small communities south of Fargo Moorhead who are going to lose their homes and livelihoods or have them become unusable/inaccessible. Are these neighbors being treated as you would like to be treated? I would propose they haven’t been allowed to speak. They don’t have the money or the voice that the promoters of the dam have, but they are very upset They have been confronted with the understanding that their land and homes don’t really belong to them and can be seized for “the greater good” as determined by the Corps of Engineers and the city of Fargo. This is especially hard for them because many have deep roots going back to the original settlement of the Red River Valley. The shifting of the problem from Fargo Moorhead onto these people constitutes a big moral problem with the Fargo Dam.|
|#2||The environmental damage to the Red River will be severe. The corridor along the river is populated by birds, waterfowl, deer, turkeys, beaver, coyotes, fox and this river is teeming with fish. The woods themselves are old and lovely. After the dam, the trees will die from the flooding and the wildlife will be gone. There will also be implications for the Boise deSioux , Ottertail, and Wild Rice Rivers further south, which will affect still more people. The DNR is not in favor of this project. A great, albeit unappreciated, resource will be destroyed. This is the second big moral problem with the Fargo Dam.|
It is almost too late. Will Fargo Moorhead take the time and put in the effort to find a plan that doesn’t have these kind of moral issues? Or will it be rushed into an expedient fix with long-term repercussions? Is it OK to sacrifice your neighbors and the environment so you can “develop”, or might a higher level of development be attainable without this particular project?
David A Ness. South on the river between Comstock and Wolverton