STUDIES
OF THE FLOODING
At least four
studies of various aspects of the flooding are underway. In addition, Gov. Bob
Wise has established a Disaster Recovery Board, which is looking at how to
rebuild and flood proof the flood-ravaged southern counties.
In response to
questions and allegations about the connection between mining and flooding,
Gov. Wise asked the state Department of Environmental Protection to organize a
study shortly after the July 8 floods. That group, with representatives from
the Division of Forestry and several other agencies, is headed by Ed Griffith,
a long-time DEP mining official. It is expected to report by Dec. 30.
The DEP group
is examining two areas with mining and some timbering, and possibly a third
control area that didn't appear to have much mining or timbering. Seng Creek
and Scrabble Creek are being examined closely, with surveys of high-water marks
and measurements of cross-sections of the creek. The area of Seng Creek near
the homes, like many in the flooded areas, had been cleaned out and altered
after the flood. However, the area between the valley fill and the homes is of
most interest to the study group, and that had not been altered much. The size
of the valley fills, mined and timbered areas is also being surveyed.
The data
gathered by the on-the-ground investigators will be fed into a computer
modeling program. Knowing the amount of mined and timbered area, the computer
will calculate how much runoff should have come off the area. This will be
compared to what actually happened. Since the exact amount of rain in those two
areas is only a rough estimate, the computer will produce estimations of runoff
for different amounts of rainfall. DEP officials hope that the modeling program
can help forecast the amount of runoff from other areas with mining and
timbering.
The second
study is being done by a conglomerate of 26 state and federal agencies. It actually
began in 2000 with a federal grant through the office of Sen. Robert Byrd. The
money was given to the Corps of Engineers, but the study is being organized by
the state Soil Conservation Agency.
The goal is a
comprehensive master plan aimed at preventing and reducing flood damage. For
the first time, officials hope, the state will have a long-term program,
instead of knee jerk reactions to individual disasters. In addition, the group
hopes to coordinate the work of all agencies, instead of stumbling over one another.
In a few months, Soil Conservation will establish a web site available both to
the public and the 26 agencies. At first, the plan will be just for the six
counties flooded this summer: Boone, Fayette, McDowell, Mercer, Raleigh and
Wyoming. But eventually it could become a model for the entire state, as well
as for the Appalachian region. John Pack at Soil Conservation believes it would
be the first, proactive and wholistic approach to flooding in the region. It is
expected to be finished by April 15, 2002.
Among the items
on the agenda:
* Inventory the
flood plains, the land use, past floods, storm water damages.
* Define the
existing state and federal programs for modifying flooding, warning of
flooding, flood-proofing buildings, and relocating towns.
* Examine how
to maintain natural and beneficial floodplain environments, including
constructed wetlands, greenbelts, riverside trains and how these can be
encouraged through legislation and regulation.
* Determine
what new kinds of programs should be implemented, including updated flood maps,
decision-making information for landowners in flood plains, enforcement of
flood plain ordinances, more watershed groups to monitor land use along streams
and eliminate debris.
* Once the best
plan for flood protection has been designed, the group will look at
legislation, funding and education necessary for implementation.
The group had
its first meeting at Twin Falls State Park Sept. 25-26. It plans to hold a
series of public meetings in the six counties this fall. Pack explained that
the final plan will not restore individual creeks. What it will provide is a
way for citizens and public officials to fix their streams and flood proof
their communities.
One activity
John Pack would like to encourage is watershed groups. These are people who
live on a stream and can monitor it daily. They clean their streams, control
the kind of debris that blocked bridges and culverts during the flood, and even
do some stream restoration. Pack believes that the active watershed group on Paint
Creek, helped prevent some flooding there. Paint is about two miles east of
Armstrong Creek in Fayette County. It was considerably less damaged than Armstrong,
though it was on the edge of the July 8 storm, making it somewhat difficult to
measure the effects of the watershed group. Pack said that the Rosgen
Classification System was used at Paint Creek to stabilize the banks and
prevent erosion.
Developed by
Dave Rosgen in the early 1990s, this classifies streams by channel width,
channel cutting, sediment, bank erosion, flood plain levels and other
characteristics. Rosgen allows researchers to interpret channel geometry and
determine if the channel is in equilibrium with its flow regime. Because
bankfull flows have the most influence on shaping and maintaining channels,
there is a relationship between the dimensions of the stream channel and the
bankfull flow. Restorers decide what class of stream is best for the elements
in its drainage area, and what kind of stream would have the least sediment
build up, bank erosion and flooding. Sometimes the stream bed will be raised and
widened and banks stabilized stabilized. For a case study of
a stream restoration using the Rosgen system: in metropolitan
Maryland.
John Pack said
they were pleased to see that the recently repaired banks of Paint Creek did
not erode in the July storms. Recently, Bill McGhee of Mullens decided to form
a citizens group to monitor streams and the two rivers that feed into the
center of Mullens. They will be on the lookout for piles of trash like the
obstacles that blocked bridges and worsened the flood. They are also looking at
land use issues along the streams, including mining and timbering. (see story)
The U.S. Geological Survey is doing its own
small study of flooding in the Pax area, as well as assisting other agencies,
such as FEMA, the Office of Surface Mining and the Environmental Protection
Agency, and participating in the 26-agency task force. Known for their rigid
scientific methods, USGS scientists often would like to jump in and study new
phenomena, but are restricted by their funding structure. Usually, they much
partner with another agency that requests their services. "It keeps us honest,"
said Ron Evaldi of the West Virginia USGS office.
USGS maintains
a network of 107 water-level gages
in streams throughout the state. It has several decades of data, which is used
to determine such things as where to put a dam to control flooding and how much
water will be available from a river for a public water system. The data from
the rain gages as well as measurements of high water marks by USGS staff and
contractors, was used to help FEMA redo the flood plain insurance maps for
Oceana and Smithers. In Smithers, the flood levels were nearly the same as in
the original map, which was done about 20 years earlier. In Oceana, the levels
were about two feet lower than that of the 1979 map.
Ironically, the
USGS in West Virginia had just completed an update of its flooding formulas, "Estimating Magnitude and
Frequency of Peak Discharges for Rural, Unregulated, Streams in West
Virginia." Done at the request of the state Division of Highways, the
study helps determine flood levels before public works projects are built.
"Many engineering projects are built within or adjacent to flood-prone
areas," the study states. "Information on past flooding and estimates
of the magnitude and frequency of future floods are critical to the safe and
economical design of hydraulic structures such as bridges, culverts, dams and
flood dikes." The study updates the equations for estimating the size of
peak discharges. However, the study cautions that the formulas can't be used in
areas with large amounts of mining: "Equations are not applicable to
heavily mined areas if excessive runoff is diverted into or outside the basin,
retained along strip benches, or retained underground."
USGS is also
working with several other federal agencies, including the Environmental
Protection Agency and Office of Surface Mining, on a comprehensive evaluation
of valley fills and mountaintop removal. The environmental impact statement was
ordered in 1999 as part of the first settlement agreement in the far-reaching
Bragg v Robertson case over valley fills. Draft reports on parts of the study
have been completed, but it is still ongoing. As part of the USGS work, it
recently produced "Reconnaissance of Stream Geomorphology, Low Streamflow,
and Stream Temperature in the Mountaintop Coal-Mining Region, Southern West
Virginia, 1999-2000." (available from the USGS office in Charleston). The
study team gathered data from 54 stream gages below valley fills and in unmined
valleys in five river basins.
After the
flood, USGS scientists had been eager to look at the effects of the flood on
Seng Creek. The EIS study looked at gradual changes in the streams below valley
fills. The flood, on the other hand, would be an episodic event--like that
forming the Grand Canyon, only on a much smaller scale. Unfortunately, Evaldi
said, by the time USGS staff got to Seng Creek, bulldozers had wiped away the
flood markers and erosion patterns necessary for a study.
USGS scientists
did fly over the flooded areas shortly after the event. They said that the
valley fills with mature vegetation held up well. However, those still
underway, with little or no cover, had severe erosion. Evaldi has determined that
one reason for the velocity of the waters was that the storm stalled over the
higher elevations, with rain cells reforming and recharging and continuing to
drop a large amount of rain in certain areas. Much of the water came down in
the headwaters of the stream. Still, he was surprised that just 5 inches of
rain could do so much damage.
The
Environmental Impact Statement study of flooding was released in draft form
early this year. It looked at three valley fills, two of them at Arch Coal's
Samples mine in Raleigh County. The EIS found that the valley fill above Seng
Creek could increase flooding up to 13 percent. Aerial photos, as well as those
taken at the fills shortly after the flood, show severe erosion. In addition,
the rushing water cut a new gully alongside the fill. One reason could be that
the mine has changed the drainage patterns of the mountain and valleys,
according to DEP inspectors. They examined the area above Seng Creek after it
flooded in late May 2000. They found that before mining, Seng Creek had
received about 25 percent of the drainage. Now it receives 40 percent.
The EIS flood
study group, which includes the Corps of Engineers, USGS and OSM, expanded its
work after the flood. USGS flagged high water marks below some fill areas,
which will be studied.
In addition to
the four comprehensive studies, two smaller ones are underway as well. The
National Park Service embarked on a broad study of damages to the New River
Gorge, which it manages. Besides inventorying the damages to park facilities,
it is looking at damage to the fish and plants in the streams and the trees and
plants on the mountain sides. It was able to produce some reports within six
weeks of the flood. See
Finally, the
Fayette County Commission voted in August to undertake a small, and hopefully
quick, look at whether timbering and mining contributed to the flooding.
Commissioner Matthew Wender recommended a study to answer the question on most
residents' minds. He wanted to be able to say whether there was just a lot of
rain--or did alterations of the hillsides increase the amount of water pouring
down on so many Fayette communities.