By Jim Rokosch, President, Bitterrooters for Planning
Have you ever seen the Los Angeles River? I’ve only seen photos, but they were enough for me to move “visiting the Los Angeles River” from my bucket list to my chuck it list. If you haven’t, don’t bother putting it on your own bucket list because it’s not worth the visit. If you have seen it – channelized, cemented in and fenced off – then perhaps you were appropriately appalled at the arrogance of the engineers who treated the river like a dog to be trained.
We’re more blessed here in the Bitterroot, where our beloved river has been allowed to meander for the most part, as it will, from one bank to the other as it responds to run-off pressure each spring.
Our county commissioners, however, have a plan in the works that, unless we speak up, has the potential to do serious harm to our river.
The commissioners are re-writing the county floodplain regulations, the document that, for many years, has prohibited residential construction and septic systems in the floodplain – and for very good reasons that probably don’t have to be listed here to anyone who has spent any time on the river, working, fishing, hunting, floating, hiking or watching wildlife.
If the commissioners have their way, these smart, proactive and time-honored restrictions on floodplain construction will be lifted.
Think about what that could mean: flood damage, people hurt or killed, property lost and, of course, higher insurance rates for everyone with property insured by the federal flood insurance program.
Ravalli County’s floodplain regulations have been in effect since 1977, and a case could be made that they’ve been neither effective nor restrictive. They’ve been permissive enough that Ravalli County has issued numerous permits for river riprap projects over many years. They certainly weren’t effective enough to protect some homes in the Victor area that were threatened several years ago by a migrating channel – homes that at about 50 feet above the river were well out of the floodplain and not even subject to floodplain regulations, because floodplain regulations only pertain to the elevation of the land, not the reality of channels that move around. A reality that streamside setbacks would address.
So what is inspiring this rewrite of often ineffective and mostly permissive regulations? The commissioners say that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) demands it.
We disagree. We believe this is nothing more than an opportunistic attempt to sacrifice the river on the altar of “private property rights.” There’s nothing “private” about property rights when your actions in the floodplain put your neighbors at risk of life, limb and yes, loss of property and loss of their property rights.
Already, riverfront property owners are lining up before the commission to assert their right to put a septic system in the floodplain if they so choose. And, of course, they’re using the code phrase “personal responsibility” to take care of things if their actions in the floodplain cause any problems to anyone downstream.
How does one accept “personal responsibility” when their home washes downstream and destroys someone else’s property? Or takes out a bridge? Or kills someone? The new floodplain regulations, now in draft form, make no mention of “personal responsibility.”
In fact, the definition of “personal responsibility” in a flood or other natural disaster seems to be this:
• Seek a government bailout at taxpayer expense, or, if unsuccessful:
• Sue the county.
If the commission adopts this assault on our river, they will no doubt claim “the law” is on their side. But the evidence instead will show that lawsuits filed against local governments for allowing construction in the floodplain that causes harm are, nationwide, more successful than lawsuits filed when government denies construction projects in the floodplain. (See: http://www.floods.org/NoAdverseImpact/NAI_AND_THE_COURTS.pdf).
Or they may claim a reliance on “science.” But these proposed regulations are no more than science fiction if commissioners – or anyone – thinks that official words on paper will stop the river from migrating or flooding, and that, even if it does flood and harm results, someone, somewhere will step up, claim “personal responsibility” and pay all the bills resulting from that harm.
It may sound like a fear-mongering stretch to say that our river is in danger of becoming like the Los Angeles River. But the people who used to fish, hunt and bird watch along the L.A. River prior to 1938, when the terrible deed was done, probably never, in their wildest nightmares, ever imagined their river as the channelized, cemented and fenced-in arrogant assault on nature it is today.
There is still time to lodge your objections with the county commission. Call them at 375-6500 and email them at gwiles@rc.mt.gov to tell them to keep the restrictions on residential construction we already have. Tell them we don’t want the Bitterroot River to look like the Los Angeles River. Tell them the Bitterroot River is not a dog to be trained. Tell them as a taxpayer, sometimes the “dog” bites back when it is mistreated, and the wounds can be outrageously costly and may never heal.