Red River Basin Disaster Information Network
On-Line Workshop
January 9, 2001 - 12:00 PM CST

Living With the Red – An Overview

Thomas Baldini
Chairman of U.S. Section/ International Joint Commission

Amy Sebring, Moderator

[Introduction]

Amy Sebring: Good afternoon, and thank you for joining us in the Red River room of the EIIP Virtual Forum. Our topic today is the IJC's final report and its proposed directive to the International Red River Board.

I would like to point out there is a link on the background page to the new section of the IJC Web site for the International Red River Board. The draft directive is linked from there, options for providing comments, as well as access to a PDF file of the final report, Living with the Red. If you have not had an opportunity to review the proposed directive, you can load it in your browser window from http://www.ijc.org/boards/irrb/draft.html for reference during our session.

It is my pleasure to introduce Commissioner Thomas Baldini, Chair of the U.S. Section of the International Joint Commission. Please see the background page for further biographical information. Tom is being assisted today by network member Lisa Bourget, and we appreciate her efforts in arranging and preparing for today's session.

Welcome, Tom, and thank you for taking time to be with us today. I turn the floor over to you at this time.

[Presentation]

Thomas Baldini: Thank you, Amy. I'd like to touch briefly on why the International Joint Commission (IJC) is involved with Red River flooding, highlight what we've learned, and then look forward to what happens next.

The IJC is a binational organization established by the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 to help prevent and resolve disputes between Canada and the United States. The IJC works through joint fact-finding and consensus. Background information on the IJC is available at http://www.ijc.org.

After the 1997 "Flood of the Century" on the Red River, the U.S. and Canadian governments asked the IJC to investigate the causes and effects of flooding in the Red River basin and to make recommendations on how to mitigate damage from future flooding. The governments recognized that measures to address future flooding must reflect the transboundary nature of the Red River basin, and asked the IJC to focus on cross-border cooperation in its work.

The IJC provided a December 1997 interim report to the two federal governments addressing short-term measures that could be taken to better prepare for future floods and describing the studies it planned to undertake.

Our final report, which was submitted to the governments in November 2000, is entitled Living with the Red, A Report to the Governments of Canada and the United States on Reducing Flood Impacts in the Red River Basin. The full text of the report is available online at http://www.ijc.org/boards/rrb/frpt0012/living.html.

What did we learn through our work in the Red River basin? We learned that while the 1997 flood may have been the flood of the century, it was not unprecedented. Larger floods have occurred. Although climate change and variability may add uncertainty, larger floods will happen again. In fact, the 1826 flood in Winnipeg, not the 1997 flood, is the largest on record. Our extrapolation of the 1826 flood upstream indicates that it could have been higher than the 1997 flood by approximately 2.5 feet at Fargo - Moorhead, 2.6 feet at Grand Forks - East Grand Forks, and one foot at Wahpeton - Breckenridge.

Much was in place in 1997 in readiness for flooding, and even more has been accomplished since the 1997 flood. However, more remains to be done. Major population centers in particular require immediate attention.

The City of Winnipeg is at risk. The city, province and Canadian federal government should focus immediate attention on designing and implementing protective measure to further protect Winnipeg. These measures must respect both the needs of Winnipeg and the interests of those outside the city who might be affected by any such measures.

Detailed assessment of the significant flooding risks facing Fargo - Moorhead is required. Ongoing studies should be expedited so that appropriate mitigation measures can be identified and quickly implemented. The work currently underway in Grand Forks andEast Grand Forks needs to be completed in a timely manner and periodically evaluated for its level of protection. The completion of studies, and the development and implementation of proposed projects to protect Wahpeton and Breckenridge, should be expedited.

We considered numerous proposals for reducing flood impacts: large reservoir storage, micro-storage (including the "waffle" concept), restoration of wetlands, drainage considerations, construction of levees or dikes, floodwalls, bypass channels, permanent evacuation of high-risk areas, flood-proofing, and the enhancement of forecasting and warning systems.

There is no "silver bullet". All possible approaches to flood reduction, including both structural and non-structural, must be considered as part of a comprehensive plan when environmentally, economically and socially justified. Comprehensive, integrated, binational solutions to flood problems are required. Flood protection projects should focus not only on reduction of flood damage, but also on protection and enhancement of the floodplain environment. Flood mitigation strategies should address the needs of small communities, individual farmsteads and agriculture, as well as major population centers.

Our report makes numerous specific recommendations for governments at all levels that provide a blueprint for action. The challenge will come in execution of these recommendations.

We have offered to assist governments by assigning certain flood-related tasks to our International Red River Board, formed by merging two of our long-existing boards into one. We have included these flood-related tasks in a proposed directive to the board.

We will be holding public meetings in Winnipeg and Grand Forks next week to receive comment on the proposed directive, and we welcome written comment through the end of the month. The proposed directive, details on the public meetings, and our e-mail addresses are available at http://www.ijc.org/boards/irrb/.

The Commission's board alone cannot accomplish all that is required to prepare the basin for future floods. Many needed activities rightfully fall within the authority and mandate of governments. Planning, coordination and action is needed that cuts across national and jurisdictional boundaries.

Governments should work with the IJC, its International Red River Board, and other bilateral organizations to ensure that appropriate arrangements are in place to coordinate and implement measures for flood preparedness and mitigation activities.

Further work - on a basin-wide basis - is needed to maintain and improve technical tools developed since the flood of 1997. These tools include a digital elevation model, decision-support system, and a virtual network to link the people, data, and models.

Further work is also needed - again, on a basin-wide basis - to develop and implement comprehensive plans, provide opportunities for multi-jurisdictional problem-solving, and integrate floodplain management activities into the broader field of watershed and basin management.

We heard general acceptance of the need for a basin-wide binational approach to transboundary water management in the Red River basin. The Memorandum of Understanding signed recently by Governors Ventura and Schafer and by Premier Doer is a promising step.

The flood of 1997 caused nearly US$5 billion in economic damages. The human costs are more difficult to measure but no less important. We feel that the recommendations we have made to governments, if implemented, will provide the basis for a much more flood resilient basin, one that will be better positioned to avoid the economic and social hardships that resulted in 1997.

We look to the governments to continue to promote a culture of flood preparedness in the Red River basin, and we will continue to provide advice and guidance within the mandate assigned to us by the governments.

I'd be happy to take questions, Amy.

[Audience Q&A]

Amy Sebring: Thank you very much, Tom. We will take audience comments and questions now.

Question:

Linwood DeLong: I notice in your reports that numerous background studies were undertaken. Are these ever released?

Thomas Baldini: Yes, many of the are already available through our website, http://www.ijc.org.

Others can be obtained via request to us -- our e-mail address is Commission@washington.ijc.org

Question:

Amy Sebring: Tom, will the IJC be represented at the upcoming TIC conference?

Thomas Baldini: Yes, in fact I'm making a presentation on Wednesday.

Question:

Gerry Galloway: What has been the reaction in the basin to the report? Tom or anyone?

Thomas Baldini: I'm presuming this is a question for all. We've heard a generally positive response, but I'd be interested in what others have heard.

Linwood DeLong: My sense in Winnipeg is that the outlying communities are quite nervous about a large storage area outside of Winnipeg, as opposed to enlarging the Floodway.

Question:

Ted Bailey: I understand there is some activity underway by the City of Winnipeg. Could Bob give us any insight to that as it is reflective of their acceptance of the report?

Bob Halliday: The city is currently working on a flood manual. Also the Feds/Province have awarded a contract for further study of Winnipeg flood protection. The contract will look at the two major projects from the IJC report. The City work includes all aspects of flood emergency management

Question:

Amy Sebring: Is that for floodway operation primarily, Bob?

Bob Halliday: Floodway operation is largely provincial but the province is examining operating rules.

Question:

Amy Sebring: Thanks Bob. Tom, once comments are collected on the proposed directive, what is the next step in finalizing the directive? Will the change in U.S. administration have any effect on the timing?

Thomas Baldini: We will be receiving comments until January 31. We'll want to consider the comments. One outstanding issue is the governments' response to the proposed flood-related tasks. The change in administration is currently a bit of an unknown.

Amy Sebring: Would you expect to have it in place by this year's flood season? Is that a factor?

Thomas Baldini: Our board is currently carrying out the activities for which it has already been responsible. The flood-related activities are a proposed addition. It may be possible to have the new directive in place prior to the flood season depending on the comments received.

Question:

Linwood DeLong: Do you know how the Floodway could be enlarged to carry more water. Will it be substantially widened. I don't think it can be deepened. I didn't get a clear sense from the report as to what might be done with the Floodway to increase its carrying capacity.

Thomas Baldini: Perhaps Bob can comment?

Bob Halliday: That is exactly the problem. Floodway expansion can consist of mostly widening but deepening in some areas. Really like threading a needle. The challenge is to find most economic solution.

Thomas Baldini: I'd like to add that the IJC's report did not get into technical details of proposals for altering the floodway.

Question:

Amy Sebring: How does the Commission envision that the Board work with the other basin organizations and government agencies that have common interests? Will it be pro-active?

Thomas Baldini: We are interested in cooperating with other existing and emerging organizations. Principal leadership must come from within the basin.

Question:

Amy Sebring: What did the IJC recommend regarding comprehensive planning - is it envisioned that a region-wide "master plan" might be useful to sustaining efforts?

Thomas Baldini: We have recommended the development of a comprehensive basin-wide plan for flood mitigation, taking into consideration broader water management issues. We were encouraged by the recent memorandum of understanding among the governors and premier.

Question:

Amy Sebring: The mandate of the Task Force was the flood issue; however, did the IJC make any recommendations regarding drought? I believe it is included in the draft directive, correct?

Thomas Baldini: No, we didn't make any recommendations regarding drought. However, such issues would need to be considered in the development of a comprehensive plan. To a limited extent, it is in the draft directive. The directive says that the board shall encourage the appropriate authorities, such as resource and emergency planning agencies for appropriate reporting and action on accidental discharges or spills, floods and droughts.

Question:

Jim Dickerson: Where can we find out more about the models being used, such as MIKE11 and FLDWAV?

Thomas Baldini: There is additional information in Appendix 4, which is our Task Force's main report. FLDWAV is the U.S. National Weather Service's model, I believe, and so more information on that could be obtained from them. I believe the province of Manitoba developed the MIKE 11 model for the basin.

Question:

Linwood DeLong: In the past there has been discussion of a master database of technical and scientific data, but I have the impression that the database has been scuttled, because of lack of funds. Can you comment on this?

Thomas Baldini: The Task Force began the development of a prototype network, but did not complete it because of lack of funds. I understand there is interest within both Canada and the United States in further development. However, someone needs to take charge, and that is best handled from within the basin.

Comment:

Bob Halliday: I think it is fair to say that the Task Force dealt with large floods and the IJC report expanded on that. I do have concerns that flood control measures could affect low flows and that must be taken into account in project development.

Thomas Baldini: That's why there is a need for a comprehensive plan.

[Closing]

Amy Sebring: Thank you very much, Tom, for being with us. Again, thanks to Lisa Bourget for her assistance, and thanks to all participants today. I will post a transcript of the session and send out a notice when it is available. Our session is concluded. Thanks for coming and please help me thank our guest.