DuckSouth.com

I stand corrected........originally ag wasnt in the c/b analysis.......Rules got changed to include.
Sorry for the misinformation.

Ive heard the figure of 85 is where the pumps would cut on and off if the gates where closed. 85 is pretty high and would allow alot of the wetlands around the Valley Park area to maintain some water.

I just saw this after making a new post on the subject. It will be interesting to see where this goes with the supposed "No EPA" oversight!

This is one of Cochran's last moves before he retires. The bs info the environmentalist and EPA pushed is one of the biggest loads of crap and misinformation ever pushed by mass media. They have no freaking clue, no ties and no documented history. Essentially without the second stage of the project constructed (Pumps) you screw south Delta communities and people.

Novacaine they do use AG in the B/C ratio but AG has been getting the raw end of the stick in the grand scheme and metro municipalities have been benefiting. Look for this to change in the near future as there is a lot of congressional insight on the republican and democratic side now who are receiving pressure from stakeholders up and down the Valley. That being said the pump stations are already authorized (just vetoed by EPA) therefore this is not a new start and current B/C ratios may not mean a hill of beans when funding is considered. Remember Cochran is head of Appropriations Committee and as all $$$ comes through funding pots now instead of earmarks you can bet your ass it is directed at times where certain senators say it should go, we have seen this first hand with DHP, Big Sun and UYP $ in recent years.

I am no expert on the drainage system of the delta but have somewhat of a functional knowledge of it. I however do not know much about the pumps. So what are the proposed locations? Where would the water be pumped too? I know the south delta benefits. Would anyone actually be harmed by this? At the end of the day we pay for all the insurance claims from these major floods so why not try and prevent it? The draining wetland stuff just sounds like a bunch of liberal BS! Also the government is going to spend this money no matter what and more than likely on something that will not benefit much of anybody.

Not saying this is the case, but all taxpayers are harmed when a project is funded that shouldn’t be. I doubt there are many residences that the pumps would protect. No one is directly adversely impacted by the pumps’ installation. It’s a benefit/cost issue and the environmental angle has also been a significant holdup.

Pumps would essentially be located to pump out of Steele Bayou, into the Yazoo/MS rivers when the gates are closed. This is the point where the reservoirs in N MS drain to.

If I remember correctly, it was back in about April of 2008 when the last big public meeting was held at the Vicksburg Convention Center, and all of the environmentalists were in town from California, Oregon, Etc., and the Yazoo Backwater was flooding at about 90', and they were all talking about how detrimental it would be to wildlife, and I just wanted to take them out and show them the turkey hatch that was underway, and under 3 feet of water. The USACE countered every argument that was put up with SCIENCE, and the environmentalists countered every argument with EMOTION, and they won. Also, I think the USACE compromised several times, and the final number for cutting on the pumps was 88' msl, which still has a huge amount of land flooded.

From a forestry and wildlife standpoint, I would sum it up as the loss of habitat function and diversity due to excessive and unnatural hydrologic conditions during the growing season.

Seems perfectly conceivable to me that the pumps might actually restore something close to the hydrology that existed prior to the Yazoo levee going in and that the environmental impacts being decried are blown out of proportion. I just can’t help but think the economic benefits are also inflated. Requiring cost sharing would ensure that that problem works itself out. I bet weve even got some locals on the board that’d be happy to throw in on a quarter billion and ensure this thing stays on budget.

Tim the benefits are no where near inflated, if anything there under valued. I use to believe that to but after witnessing and working the program management side of the coin up and down the valley I can tell you the pumps are needed not now but yesterday. If this same debacle in any Parish in South LA the federal government would be faced with an Environmental Justice suit with FULL backing from their US senators and congressional leaders. It happened and I witnessed as well as many others to the tune of $1.5B, but since it’s LA and not MS the mainstream media hides. If you don’t believe me take ride down LA state HWY 23 and see what the work is protecting. In the grand scheme from a government project $200M for a pump station is miniscule and anyone that has put boots on the ground in the South Drlta for any length of time knows the ecosystem restoration benefits the pumps would bring.