Prayers go out to the Red River Valley.

[CANOPY SAM]

As our regional weatherman is finally saying we're facing warming temps by the end of next week, I just wanted to take a moment to ask folks to join me in prayers for everyone facing possible flooding in the coming weeks.

We're witnessing shocking events all around us in our country right now. Let's remember those in our country with somber regard, but let's not forget those facing a possible catastrophe here at home.

Please show some love for our brothers and sisters in the Red River Valley, and if needed, please volunteer to help with the flood fight (if it comes to this), if at all possible.

My thoughts, and most sincere prayers go out to everyone involved in the Red River of the North flood fight this spring.

[slammer]

Lets hope for a slow melt which is whats been happening. Communities up and down the Red have added different forms of protection over the years and some has yet to be tested. I think there has to be some effort in the valley to control the amount of drainage that has been added in the last 10-20 years. Flooding has become more frequent with higher crests and more volatility. It never used to be that way.

Personally I dont see it as bad as they are predicting so lets hope I'm right.

[Jim Uran]

Definitely praying for the area.

[Rick G]

The people in the Red River valley will be in my thoughts and prayers in the up coming weeks.

[Pinusbanksiana]

They don't need prayers, they need help. And sandbags.

[jentz]

I lived in the Mississippi flood plain,It was a witch!! That said there is lots of cleanup and loss.The Feds will cover lots,FEMA will be involved and state monies.LOTs of taxpayer money will save them.It does most every year! Then again next year Taxpayers pay for this.I moved out' Of course we were paid to move, kinda resettled.That saves the taxpayers from paying for what could be avoided!!!! Years ago living on or near a river system was a must for commerce we have gone beyond that.These flood plains should be permanently evacuated.Save the taxpayers for yearly extra charges.

[Brad B]

For the Grandforks Area to be hit by flooding again the water would have to get over the 40+ foot levy the city built along the river(built after the 1997 flood). this is now all a green way so if the water rises up between this area the only thing that will be effected will be the green wy and there is nothing in this area that can get damaged. on a side note thou if it does flood along the red again expect good fishing this year after the water settles down. this is the observation of a fishing guide/friend of mine that is a well known guide on the Red out of Grand Forks. some of the smaller town down river like Drayton may be hit hard if the flooding happens but hope they learned how to prevent it from what happened in 1997.

[knoppers]

the sad thing is its going to, and has happened every year, because of the tiling and ditching, and plowing over the swamps land. water now rushes down into the river watershed much faster than years ago. I don't blame the farmers, but the need for ethanol has created a monster, which hurts our world more than it helps.

[CANOPY SAM]

I think people most often remember the cities along the river, which are certainly important, but forget there are literally hundreds, if not thousands of family farms all along the river basin that are susceptible to high water.

Many of these farmsteads are inundated with water year after year. Yes, there have been many safeguards put in place, but the flooding still causes lots of hardship, weeks or months of inconvenience, and is a financial nightmare every year the water comes up.

Please just keep these folks in mind, and come and help out if you can. Thanks.

[mainbutter]

but forget there are literally hundreds, if not thousands of family farms all along the river basin that are susceptible to high water...inundated with water year after year

And we keep subsidizing and supporting.. the costs associated with farming these areas should be represented in what they produce. If farming this area without yearly flood support, should this area be farmed?

There are good reasons I live in Minneapolis, and not New Orleans, LA, San Francisco, or flood plains.

[CaptainMusky]

Though I never want to see someone get hurt or lose property but sometimes these things are caused by our own doing.

I really wish they would spend the money on the diversion around Fargo and then again grand forks but apparently they would rather nickel and dime every year vs spending money on a permanent fix

[delcecchi]

Though I never want to see someone get hurt or lose property but sometimes these things are caused by our own doing.

I really wish they would spend the money on the diversion around Fargo and then again grand forks but apparently they would rather nickel and dime every year vs spending money on a permanent fix

Who is this "they" and whose money would they spend on the diversion? If the "they" is the state of North Dakota and the money is theirs, since they are rolling in it at the moment, more power to them. If the "they" is congress and the money is all of ours, not so fast there bunkie.

[aanderud]

Last I heard, they were talking about something like 1.5 billion dollars if they opt for a diversion (40% of that federal dollars and the rest local and state dollars). That's like 10k per man, woman, and child in that metropolitan area. That's to save at most -- what, a few thousand houses that are in the flood plain under 44 feet? I say Nodak should spend 1/10 of that (from their own coffers) to build permanent dikes, which would protect 80% of those folks, tell the ones on the wrong side of the dikes they're out of luck, and be done with this annual adventure. Grand forks somehow has managed to do quite well without a 1.5 billion dollar diversion channel.

Then again, one other thing they could do is just look at doing a REASONABLE cost diversion. The one they did in Winnipeg was 63 million dollars in the 1960s, the equivalent of roughly $360 million today. How can they protect their city, which is 3x larger than Fargo, with a $360 million dollar diversion -- but it costs FOUR TIMES that for the Fargo one? Must be a lot of folks getting a lot richer on it than is necessary, if you ask me. Let no good crisis go to waste.

[Myrt]

They also went cheaper than what they could've for the Winnipeg diversion as they stopped short of Lake Winnipeg and brought it back into the Red north of the dam at Lockporte, save the city... Screw Selkirk.

[CaptainMusky]

Who is this "they" and whose money would they spend on the diversion? If the "they" is the state of North Dakota and the money is theirs, since they are rolling in it at the moment, more power to them. If the "they" is congress and the money is all of ours, not so fast there bunkie.

in the end WE are paying every year to clean up and rebuild there is a flood. It results in higher insurance premiums for you and I as well.

You take the costs of each recovery effort and extrapulate that over 10 floods (which is provably 10 years at this rate) and the cost is covered.

Something needs to be done. Remove homes, higher dikes, diversion. The state of ND has a huge surplus they can shift some funds around.

[CANOPY SAM]

Thanks for all the kind and heartfelt thoughts and prayers guys.

[creepworm]

Last I heard, they were talking about something like 1.5 billion dollars if they opt for a diversion (40% of that federal dollars and the rest local and state dollars). That's like 10k per man, woman, and child in that metropolitan area. That's to save at most -- what, a few thousand houses that are in the flood plain under 44 feet? I say Nodak should spend 1/10 of that (from their own coffers) to build permanent dikes, which would protect 80% of those folks, tell the ones on the wrong side of the dikes they're out of luck, and be done with this annual adventure. Grand forks somehow has managed to do quite well without a 1.5 billion dollar diversion channel.

Then again, one other thing they could do is just look at doing a REASONABLE cost diversion. The one they did in Winnipeg was 63 million dollars in the 1960s, the equivalent of roughly $360 million today. How can they protect their city, which is 3x larger than Fargo, with a $360 million dollar diversion -- but it costs FOUR TIMES that for the Fargo one? Must be a lot of folks getting a lot richer on it than is necessary, if you ask me. Let no good crisis go to waste.

Compare land prices around Winnipeg and Fargo and you will see where a large part of that extra cost is coming from.

[CANOPY SAM]

C'mon guys. Although I understand why you're voicing your frustrations over this seemingly easy to fix problem, now is not the time or place to hash out opinions on how to fix it.

I simply asked folks to keep the people of the Red River Valley in their thoughts (and prayers) over the next few weeks and months, and come out and help whenever you have the opportunity.

A diversion is not going to solve flooding problems for many of the smaller towns, and cities along the river, not to mention all the farms and homesteads that are still stuck within the flood plain.

Yes, if we were to relocate New York City, New Orleans, and all the major metropolitan cities along the Mississippi, and while we're at it move everyone off the continental coast line, and everyone west of the San Andreas fault line needs to come east, then we could dramatically decrease the payout on all these apparently avoidable natural disasters. But that's no easy, or inexpensive task either.

Please, if you'd prefer to debate over the best resolution to this issue take it to the "discussion" thread. Otherwise, all I'm asking for here is a little empathy, and some volunteers to pitch in if they can.

Thanks. Sam.

[harvey lee]

Talked to a few friends in Fargo and on the Sheyenne river yesterday.

One in Fagro said they are saying now the flood should not be near as bad as predicted a month or so ago.

Friend SW of Fargo on the Sheyenne that always has alot of water and typically washes out the bridge by his house has next to no water in the river but it is rising slowly.

If the heavy rains stay away for a bit, it looks like it may not be near as bad as predicted.

Very good friend of mine who lives 50 miles SW of Fargo on the Sheyenne river is a bit more relaxed as the water is not coming like they thought. No, they are not totally out of the woods but it appears to be better than thought.

Good news for you Scoot as you will be able to cross the bridge to turkey hunt otherwise you would have to hunt north of the river, but there are a few birds there also. Hope you get a shott at a nice tom with your stick and string.

[harvey lee]

I think people most often remember the cities along the river, which are certainly important, but forget there are literally hundreds, if not thousands of family farms all along the river basin that are susceptible to high water.

Many of these farmsteads are inundated with water year after year. Yes, there have been many safeguards put in place, but the flooding still causes lots of hardship, weeks or months of inconvenience, and is a financial nightmare every year the water comes up.

Please just keep these folks in mind, and come and help out if you can. Thanks.

How true, Frien of mine thet lives on the Sheyenne south of Leonard had water from the river in his fields until late june not that many years ago. Nothing got planted and they had alot of clean up in the fields from all the dump from the river flood.

Then, the bridge went under and the gravel on the road washed out for 5-8ft on both sides of the bridge so they could not get out for close to 2 weeks as they could not cross the bridge and that is thier only way out. Could have drove out through the Sheyenne Nat Grasslands but that was all flooded on the road also.

[CaptainMusky]

By the sounds of it many of the prayers will be answered. Thats a good thing. Hopeful the flooding that does occur will have minimal impact and property damage.

Farmers are already getting a late start due to all the snow, now if they have water sitting around for months after it would be crippling for them.

[Thunderfoot]

The Fargo diversion will never happen, and it shouldn't. All it will do is move the water to a different area a create problems for other people. This idea that the people of Fargo are somehow more special and need to be protected is ridiculous, and I am from Fargo. I do agree permanent flood protection needs to be put into place but a diversion is NOT the way to do it. They need to take a look at what Grand Forks did and work with Moorhead to create more of a greenway along the river. I don't care if you have a multi-million dollar home on the red that would need to be moved to do it, you should have thought about that before you built it. Rural communities need your thoughts and help much more than the Fargo-Moorhead region.