In September, 2013, as you probably know, Colorado faced some of the worst floods to the state in recent history. Lives were tragically lost, many thousands of survivors were displaced, and the overflowing of rivers caused widespread damage. The flooding in terms of intensity in some areas is unrivaled to any event since the tragic flooding of 1976. In this year’s floods, some areas along the Big Thompson River received an average year’s worth of rainfall in just a few short hours. In the aftermath of this devastating flood, what can we learn from the event to plan better in the future? I would like to offer my thoughts on a few areas related to this.
Fire Risk and Development Patterns
I have read a few opinion pieces in the Denver Post about the aftermath of the Colorado floods, and a post from Allen Best (accessed at: Allen Best’s Opinion Piece) stuck in my mind. In the piece, he compared this year’s floods to the floods in 1976, where he witnessed the Big Thompson River’s devastation first hand. He made the point that according to the most recent Census Bureau statistics, Colorado has 5.2 million people, almost double the population of 1970. Furthermore, development has not occurred evenly across the state in that time, which means that areas of significant population growth are disproportionately susceptible to the potential natural disasters that surround the area. It appears that in the aftermath of the floods, both the unprecedented rainfall and the recent wildfires contributed to the devastation parts of Colorado faced.
Prior to the floods last month, Colorado experienced a series of wildfires over the last two years that scorched both homes and forests surrounding the rivers that would eventually flood. As the land heals from the fires, the affected lands are not as stable and are susceptible to landslides during heavy rains. There is clear evidence that burn areas exacerbated the flood damage in places like Jamestown and areas around Colorado Springs that recently experienced wildfires.
In response, according to a September 30th article in the Denver Post, Governor John Hickenlooper has set up a task force to look at building codes specifically for areas near potential fire or flood risks. The committee is exploring issues including setbacks, insurance standards in high fire and flood risk areas, and potential fees for citizens building in these areas. I believe that as long as the process is well thought out and is not a knee-jerk reaction to the floods, that these potential changes could be helpful to these communities. While I certainly can understand why people would like to live in very wooded areas or near streams and rivers, they should also be aware of the potential dangers of living there. The task force should enact sensible policies that seek to limit the potential risks of building and living in these areas.
Planning for Water Supply in the West
I think all states in the Western United States can learn a lesson from the floods that while we can never plan for a disaster of this magnitude, we have to plan for unreliable long-term water supplies. A few weeks ago, I wrote about the fight between Texas and the country of Mexico over Rio Grande water entitlement (My Texas-Mexico Piece). In the piece, I pointed out that under the treaty with the US, Mexico only has to release water to maintain a five year average of deliveries above a certain threshold. The treaty essentially allows Mexico to withhold water deliveries during times of drought like now, and they will release water if they get floods from monsoons or a tropical storm. My point in the comparison is that rainfalls are unpredictable and more importantly uneven. As such, we have to plan for long-term water supplies in Colorado and across the Western United States that will sustain us through times of drought.
Up until the floods last month, Colorado faced a very similar situation as Texas. According to research conducted by Stratecon Inc., prices for Colorado-Big Thompson units have surged over the last few years—with average prices increasing from just over $6,500/unit in December 2010 to over $18,000/unit in August 2013. The reasons? First, drought conditions gripped much of the Colorado in the year prior to the floods. Also, increased oil and gas exploration put even further pressure on the state’s limited water supplies. Does the situation that Colorado faced sound similar to the water challenges in Texas? You bet. That is why I think it is so important for states in the Western US to have a long-term sustainable plan to address their long-term water supply needs.
The fact of the matter is that rainfall patterns in the Western US are rarely predictable or even. However, many lives and livelihoods rely on the water supply that these rains provide. While I understand that it is a delicate issue, our stakeholders and lawmakers should take on the important task of determining how to most efficiently and effectively provide water resources to the most users possible considering the supply constraints. This exercise, along with sensible measures to address the risks of building in high fire or flood dangers could help to re-build the communities long-term that the floods affected. Nothing can change the tragic loss of life and property that the floods caused. I only hope that we can use this experience to think critically about our interactions with Mother Nature and create long-term sustainable solutions to the challenges she gives us.