90 



Footnotes 



1. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. A Casebook in Managing 

 Rivers for Multiple Uses, p. 29 ( 1991) (hereinafter Casebook|. 



2. William Becker. Noah's Anrni<eci«nr. Uii Not Rebuild on the Floodplain. 

 Waihirt(ton Post. Sepc 11 1993. alCS (heranafter f/oeh'i ArrhlMctMrz]. 



3. Noah i ^/rAireerw/r. tupra note 2, at 30. 



4 Mucanaw Dcmissie and Abdul Khan. Influence of Wetlands on Streamflow 



in III, no,, Illinois Slate Waler Survey for the Illinois Department of Conscrva- 



i^n. 49 (1993) (here. nailer Influence of Wetlands] 



1 Thomas E. Oahl. Weilood, Losses ia //«■ (/niirif Shtarl /7«0i io /9«0i. 



Department of Interior. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 21 (1990) 



6 Kenneth l_ WahL Kevin C Vimng. and Gregg 1 Wiche. Precipitation in the 



Upper Miitituppi River Basin. January I through July II. IV9S. U.S. GeolOgl- 



cal Survey circular 1 1 20-B ( 1 993). 



7. Influence of Wetlands, aupra note 3. 



8. 14. 



9. R J>. Noviuki. Hydrology of Wacom™ s Wetlands. U.S. Geological Survey. 

 Madison. Wisconsin (1982). 



10. See generally CM. Prior and I.H. Hen. Floods In Minnesota. Magnitude 

 and Frequency. Minnesota Department of Conservation (1961 ): C.T. Haan and 

 H.P. Johnson, Hydraulic Model of Runoff from Depreliional Areas. American 

 Society of Cultural Engineers. 11:364-367 (1968); D.W. DeBoer and H.P. 

 Johnson, Simulation of Runoff from Depression Characterized Watersheds. 

 American Society of Agricultural Engineers. 14(4)^13-620 (1971); K.L. 

 Campbell and H J*. Johnson, Hydrologic Simulation of Watersheds with Artifi- 

 cial Drainage. Water Resources Research 1 1(1): 120-126 (1975): LD. Moore 

 and CX. Larson. Effects of Drainage Projects on Surface Runoff from Small 

 Depressional Watersheds in the North Central Region. Water Resources Re- 

 search, Bulletin 99 (1979). 



1 1 . One L_ Loucks, Restoration of the Pulse Corneal Function of Wetlands and 

 la Relationship so Water Quality Objectives, in Wetland Creation and Restora- 

 tioo: the Status of the Science, 468 (1990). 



12. Id. 



13. R.T. Reppert, W. Sigleo. F. Stakhiv. L. Messuram. and C. Meyers. Wetland 

 Values: Concepts and Methods for Wetlands Evaluation. ( 1 979). 



14. Id. 



15. Charles B. Belt. Jr, 77ie 1973 Flood and Han's Constriction of lite 

 Mississippi River. Science. Vol. 189:681 (I97S) (hereinafter The I97J Flood\: 

 see-also R.G. Kazmann. Modern Hydrology. 1 15-116 (1972). 



16. TV 197} Flood. 



17. M. 



18. Jerry L. Rasmusscn and Jim Milligan. 77ie River Floodway Concept: A 

 Reasonable and Common Sense Alternative for Flood Control. Department of 

 Interior. U.S. Rsh and Wildlife Service. (1 993). 



19. /Tie 1973 Flood, supra note IS. at 684. 



20. Robert M Survms and Adam 8. JafTc Unintended Impacts of Public 

 Invest me nts on Private Decisions: The Depletion of Forested Wetlands. The 

 American Economic Review, 80:337 (1990). 



21. Id. at 349 



22. Id. at 349. 



23. Casebook, supra note 1. at S. The Corps study concluded that upstream 

 wetlands played a critical role in reducing flooding further downstream, and 

 that wetlands were found to act like a scries of reservoirs, absorbing and storing 

 flood waters, and then releasing water over time. See VS. Army Corps of 

 Engineers, New England Division. Natural Valley Storage: A Partnership with 



Nature. Public Information Fact Sheets. Spring 1976. Spring I977, Spring 

 1978; and Arthur F Doyle. The Charles River Watershed: A Dual Approach in 

 Floodplain Management. Proceedings of Ihe National Wetland Symposium: 

 Wetland Hydrology. Association of Stale Wetland Managers (1988). 



24. Casebook, supra note I. al 13 



25. Id. al 39 



26. Id. al 69-73. 



27. TJ. Glaulhier and Katie McGinly. Guidance Memorandum Regarding 

 Procedures for Evaluation and Review of Repair and Restoration Project! for 

 Leveet. Executive Office of the President. Office of Management and Budcet 

 (1993). 



28. Id. see also statement of Edward Hecker. Chief. Readiness Branch. US. 

 Army Corps of Engineers. Post Flood Recovery in the Mississippi River Basin 

 Conference. St Louis. Aug. .10. 1993 Four-fifths of ihe failed Midwest Iciees 

 are not eligible for federal assistance from the Corps under Pub. L. No. 84-99. 



29. Robert L Koenig. My People Prefer Leaving Floodplains to ihe Rivers: but 

 Pol of Buyout Monev May Run Dry. St. Louis Post Dispatch. September 19 

 1993. at I. 



30. 44 CFR see. 204.400(m); see also statement of Larry Zenzinger. Chief of 

 Public Assistance Programs. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Aug. 

 30. 1993. Post Flood Recovery in the Mississippi Basin Conference. Associa- 

 tion of Stale Floodplain manager-sand Avsocianon of Slate Wetland Managers 

 F edeeal Assistance to Midwest Communities for Relocation and Elevation of 

 Flood Damaged Property. Federal Emergency Management Agency (August 

 1993). The U.S. House of Representatives and US. Senate passed legislation 

 which increased the amount of FEMA hazard mitigation funding from S24 

 million 10 $105 million. 



Other programs provide funding for relocation: under FEM A's National Flood 

 Insurance Program and Individual and Family Grant Program, disaster housing 

 assistance can be provided to individuals for up to 18 months while relocation 

 and elevation programs arc being developed and implemented. The Cora Brown 

 Fund can be used for relocation out of hazardous areas, and for hazard 

 mitigation and floodplain managemenL 



The Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Community 

 Block Development Grant Program can fund acquisition, relocation, or eleva- 

 tion. The Small Business Administration (SBA) provides disaster loans to 

 homeowners and businesses to repair or replace property damaged in a declared 

 disaster. 



The Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) is authorized to make rural hous- 

 ing loans and grants to buy. build or repair homes io rural areas. The section 

 502. Home Ownership Loan Program for low income applicants can be used 

 for elevation or relocation. Congress provided $1.2 billion supplemental appro- 

 priations and the maximum loan amount is $105,000. The section S04 Home • 

 Improvement Loans and Repair Loans and Grants Program can provide funds 

 10 elevate homes or farm structures: $125 million was added to the loan 

 program and $125 millioo was added to the grant program through the 

 appropriation. The maximum grant is $5,000, and is only available to low 

 income senior citizens. The maximum loan tsS 15.000. FHmA emergency loans 

 are available for family farmers and ranchers to refinance existing debt, and to 

 clean up and restore farm structures. Loans are provided at 45 percent interest 

 over a 3-40 year period for physical losses. The supplemental appropriation 

 added $80 million to the program. 



31. Statement of Tom Wehri. Assistant Director. Watershed Projects Division. 

 U.S. Department of Agriculture. Soil Conservation Service, Aug. 30. 1993. 

 Note: The Soil Conservation Service received $60 million for disaster relief and 

 plans to spend up to $15 million to enroll farmers in the Emergency Wetlands 

 Reserve Program. See the News Briefs section for more details on the Emer- 

 gency WRP. 



continued from page V 



It is imperative that urban waterways be recognized as a 

 key element of the urban infrastructure. Protection, enhance- 

 ment and restoration of riparian and wetlands ecosystems 

 represents a cost-effective, multiple value adjunct to tradi- 

 tional solutions to urban water quality problems. Urban 

 waterway restoration will not only assist in cleaning up the 

 nation's waters but will also create jobs, address environ- 

 mental justice issues, improve fish and wildlife habitat, 

 create a network of greenways, enhance riverfront economic 

 development opportunities, provide recreational opportuni- 

 ties, enhance adjacent property values and improve the 

 quality of life in out metropolitan centers. 



Urban watersheds restoration will help to generate a pa- 

 rade of new constituencies for the protection of rural and 

 wilderness ecosystems. There is little doubt that tomorrow's 

 wild and scenic river advocates are today's urban youth — 

 kids chasing butterflies along north Richmond's Wildcat 

 Creek, leading nature study walks on Denver's Platte River 

 Greenway, picking tires out of Washington's Anacostia 

 River, and planting cottonwoods on Portland's Columbia 

 Slough. ■ 



NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1993 7 



