The lovely and talented Anne Linehan points out this piece from the Reason Foundation. It seems environmentalist groups have consistently — and successfully — opposed efforts to improve flood-control structures around Lake Pontchartrain. FrontPageMag writes:
In the 1970s, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity Hurricane Barrier Project planned to build fortifications at two strategic locations, which would keep massive storms on the Gulf of Mexico from causing Lake Pontchartrain to flood the city.
"The floodgates would have blocked the flow of water from the Gulf of Mexico, through Lake Borgne, through the Rigolets [and Chef Mentuer] into Lake Pontchartrain,” declared Professor Gregory Stone, the James P. Morgan Distinguished Professor and Director of the Coastal Studies Institute of Louisiana State University. “This would likely have reduced storm surge coming from the Gulf and into the Lake Pontchartrain,” Professor Stone told Michael P. Tremoglie during an interview on September 6. The professor concluded, “[T]hese floodgates would have alleviated the flooding of New Orleans caused by Hurricane Katrina.”
Why was this project aborted? As the Times-Picayune wrote, “Those plans were abandoned after environmental advocates successfully sued to stop the projects as too damaging to the wetlands and the lake’s eco-system.” Specifically, in 1977, a state environmentalist group known as Save Our Wetlands (SOWL) sued to have it stopped. SOWL stated the proposed Rigolets and Chef Menteur floodgates of the Lake Pontchartrain Hurricane Prevention Project would have a negative effect on the area surrounding Lake Pontchartrain.
Thanks, greenies.
Filed Under Uncategorized ·
Comments
12 Responses to “Did eco-weenies doom New Orleans?”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...LST Book Club
-
Defending Identity: Its Indispensable Role in Protecting Democracy
by Natan Sharansky -
Fear No Evil
by Natan Sharansky -
The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror
by Anatoly Shcharansky -
The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul
by Yoram Hazony -
Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There
by David Brooks -
Snobbery: The American Version
by Joseph Epstein -
A Conflict of Visions: Idealogical Origins of Political Struggles
by Thomas Sowell
To answer your question Matt…NO…Eco-weenies did not doom New Orleans. Nearly 100 years of engineering projects sold as the final solution to Mother Nature’s fury doomed New Orleans. New Orleans used to flood periodically from the Mississippi River. So rather than be smart about it and stop building where it flooded, we decided to “tame the mighty river”. In our zeal to do so, we managed to eliminate replenishment of natural barriers protecting New Orleans from storm surge, we encouraged the natural subsidence by pumping groundwater from beneath the city, we deprived the land surface of regular replenishment of sediment, and by loading the land surface down, we increased the natural compaction rate of the underlying soils. When we learned that we were doing all of this, we didn’t stop and decide to try to undo the harm we were causing, we built taller levees and larger pumping stations. When we learned that the barrier islands were eroding away without replenishment due to the increasing channelization of the river, we didn’t seek to find ways to undo that harm, we proposed building new man made barriers. At every turn, when we had a chance to undo the cause of the harm (channelizing the river behind ever taller levees), we instead decided that some man made engineered structure was the better solution because we were determined to prove that we could beat Mother Nature by “taming the mighty river”. The problem is that ever since we channelized the river, we have been engineering “solutions” to the symptoms of the real problem. New Orleans was built in a bad spot, and we made it far worse with our attempts to tame the river. If we would quit trying to use the same kinds of “solutions” to fix problems that are caused by our earlier “solutions”, we might find that we aren’t having to throw so much good money after bad fixing what we screwed up. Instead of fighting the river all this time, we should have been working WITH it to solve the original problem.
So maybe a short-sighted person who didn’t look very far back could believe that blaming the “eco-weenies” for New Orleans’ situation is appropriate. But if you look further back at our long nationwide history of failures when going head to head with Mother Nature with our “mighty engineering prowess”; you find that we almost never make the problem that was supposed to be solved better, and usually wind up making it worse and spending more money to fix the problems we cause with our engineering “solutions”.
And no, I am not somebody who thinks there is really a “Mother Gaia” out there directing her wrath at those who oppose her. I simply have seen far too many examples of the extremes of nature and the utter failure of engineers to successfully create “solutions” without creating side effects that are almost as bad, if not worse than the original ones.
SO…… It wasn’t President Bush’s fault after all? Now there’s someone new to blame? Shall we see how long it will take for someone to start tree hugger bashing?
Not that I’m an Oprah fan, but it will be interesting to watch her today and see if she tells the truth or plays the race/blame card!
The only reason to continue with the blame game is if you are somebody who intends to rely on the government to protect or save you in a time of emergency. I have far too little faith in anything the government does to ever allow myself to become helpless in the face of their inaction. Those seeking to figure out which government entity to blame should instead blame themselves for relying on the government for their own personal safety to begin with. In the end, blame in this disaster is a useless emotional waste of time, and we should all learn the object lesson of self-reliance from it and move on. The government is already going to waste millions of dollars on blue ribbon panels that will investigate and find that nobody really did anything terribly wrong (because thats what blue ribbon panels are designed to do), anything we do to make the issue seem more important is just going to encourage the sum of money wasted to be larger and the on-camera theatrics to be even more dramatic.
Bill F,
O-Reilly expressed a similar sentiment concerning the governments lack of ability to deal with these things, and was pooh-poohed by people on both ends of the political spectrum. I agree with both of you Bills. Government, be they local, state, or federal, will not save the day.
Matt: any time you precede a name with the words “lovely and talented”, that DEMANDS a link to a place that offers visible proof, wouldn’t you say? Faithful LST readers demand video!
Bill F., reasoned arguments, as always. You’re my go-to guy on environmental stuff.
Kevin, you can trust my judgment on this. I don’t know everything about women, but I know enough to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Here’s another funny for you all:
The NYT has been bashing Bush over levee funding, but the NYT has come out against funding for it and other Mississippi River flood control projects time and time again, as recently as April 2005 when the NYT opposed $17 billion in Army Corps flood control projects for “environmental” reasons.
Here’s a long and undistinguished list of the NYT’s editorials opposing flood control funding:
http://eurota.blogspot.com/2005/09/
msm-in-their-own-words-continuing.html
hat tip to power line
I have a funny for you. Guess which one is true.
1. Wild monkeys tore off my Levis and stole my underpants.
2. Louisiana offiicials either stole or without those funds being directed for safety made for many great BINGO nites. Or those funds were directed to Jesse Jackson.
All for now
Deke
Speaking of Jackson. I am waiting to see the money trail of the rebuilding contracts that wind up going thru him. Lets see, black areas should have black companies used to rebuild. Jackson will facilitate the efforts and take his piece off the top.Follow the cameras, Follow the money. Follow Jackson. Sharpton might knock him over getting to the trough first.
Gregg,
I am thinking you are my kind of racist. If I had a kind of racist. I am waiting for the book to come out to tell me what kind of racist I am. I’m not sure.
You know, you try to be a good racist but you just don’t know. It’s like men shopping for shoes. You know what you want but you would rather go on price. You don’t even shop you go straight to the store and buy at price and what looks good.
I guess I should consult Mrs. Deke who can shop price and item like nobodies business. She could tell me who to hate and why. She’s good!
Although, as you point out. Ain’t no shopping needed. The item we seek is in plain sight.
Your servant,
Deke
Whoop!
Deke
I am not a racist. I can stop whenever I want. I just do it on the weekends thats all. Hey, I know some black people. I admit though I never really liked the “raise the roof” gesture or the “you go girl” come back and my pants all fit. Does that make me a bad person? I think not.
I like fried chicken and watermellon but not Big Red soda. Dont tell anyone but i like Collard Greens with bacon. Shhh. I also bend over and slap my thigh when I laugh hard.
I think Halle Berry is kinda hot! See, I am no racist! Although I would never consider buying an Escalade I do use Sprint as my cell phone service.
When I used to smoke I didnt like Kools and I opened my boxes on the top. Does that make me a racist?
You know, now that I think of it my rims are standard. Not 24″ like the brothus. Still, I think I have some street cred left. What do you think Deke. Should I attend a diversity training class?
As long as we’re goofin ’round, I must say - Halle Berry is *very* hot…