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

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

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

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