INNOVATION July-August 2013

f ea t u r e s

in insufficient area for flood retention. Moreover, Germany is densely populated (averaging about 235 people per km 2 compared to about five per km 2 in BC) and convincing farmers to allow flooding of their lands to protect downstream cities is not easy, even with the offer of full compensation packages. In response to the 2013 flood disaster, minister-president of Bavaria, Horst Seehofer, ordered the minister responsible for flood control to prepare a dossier for an improved flood management program to be submitted within two weeks. Moreover, Seehofer announced that forced property acquisitions would need to be accelerated in the future if individual farmers resisted the designation of their land as flood polders. The 2002 and 2013 floods made it abundantly clear that compensating farmers is far less expensive than allowing entire towns to flood. Delays in designating areas to be inundated in case of an extreme flood, as well as residents’ and farmers’ resistance to set-back dikes, led to the disastrous flooding along the lower Danube River between Straubing and Vilshofen. Ironically, several dike failures led to downstream flood relief. For example, the dike breach that flooded the town of Fischerdorf on the Danube River reduced the expected flood stage in the larger downstream Deggendorf by 0.5 m. One important aspect that was highlighted in the recent floods is that local or provincial management of flood risk rarely works. In

several cases it became clear that floods have to be managed for the whole nation, and in between nations that share international watersheds. Only then can successful flood management be possible. Alberta’s Flood In June 2013, two days of high-intensity rainfall triggered the most disastrous flooding in Alberta’s history. A low-pressure system in southern Alberta, blocked by a high-pressure system to the north, caused 48-hour precipitation to exceed 100 millimetres. Much of this precipitation fell on already saturated or partially frozen ground, with rain-on-snow contributing to snowmelt. This resulted in particularly high discharges along the South Saskatchewan, Bow, Little Bow, Elbow, Highwood, Red Deer and Sheep rivers and their tributaries. Province-wide, four lives were lost and over 100,000 people were displaced. Calgary’s central business district was entirely evacuated, and direct damage costs may top $5 billion. Other costs more difficult to quantify include indirect economic losses, environmental contamination, and short and long-term impacts to quality of life. Recovery will take years, with some losses unrecoverable, such as property lost to bank encroachment along Cougar Creek in the town of Canmore. Alberta’s Flood Response Alberta’s 2013 flood response was swift and apparently well- coordinated, involving several levels of government, military personnel, and countless civilian volunteers. Intense media coverage, sensational imagery and frequent updates by political leaders brought flood-related news into Canadian households. However, the scrutiny provided a harsh reminder that, like most flood disasters, many of the consequences were preventable. It came to public attention that a 2006 ministerial task force report, released only in 2012, had recommended several measures that were not considered in subsequent land use planning. Task force recommendations had included measures to identify flood risks, support land use decisions that minimize flood risk, and provide technical expertise to municipalities for flood hazard and risk management. Key among these was the recommendation to cease sales of Crown land in known flood risk areas. Unfortunately, the decision to delay release of the report meant that most of the recommendations had no real chance of being considered, let alone implemented. Given the rapid rate of urban development around Calgary then, the 2013 flood losses were arguably far BC was an early leader in the development of flood prevention programs in Canada, with formal programs such as the Lower Mainland Regional Management Planning Board (1966-1969), Floodplain Development Control Program (1975-2003), aspects of the Agricultural Land Commission, and with federal government partnership, the Fraser River Flood Control Program (1968-1995) and the Floodplain Mapping Program (1987-1998). However, since 2003 the responsibility for managing development in floodplain areas in BC has been delegated to local governments. The Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations has established land use guidelines, but no longer plays a direct role in approving development in flood hazard areas. The Ministry’s Flood Safety Program sets dike safety standards, higher than they might have been. How Does BC Compare?

Control your projects from initiation to closure.

Enrollment Bonus: Receive the newest iPad

“Go Green” and manage your learning materials paperlessly – yours to keep afterwards!

The Masters Certificate in Project Management VANCOUVER & VICTORIA LOCATIONS

Get the knowledge and tools you need to consistently deliver projects on time, on budget, within scope – and beyond expectations. This 18 day program features the very best trainers in Canada and is delivered over 5 months to minimize interruptions to your work schedule.

Call 250-472-4138 to receive a detailed brochure or email tzenab@uvic.ca. http://Execprograms.uvic.ca/ ProjectManagement

In partnership with...

18

J u ly/Au g u s t 2 013

i n n o v a t i o n