MITIGATION STRATEGIES AND ACTION

Due to ever-rising disaster costs and the multi-jurisdictional issues involved in hazard reduction, the Federal Emergency Management Agency along with other Federal, State and local agencies, have adopted a comprehensive and coordinated approach to hazard mitigation. The basis of this intergovernmental approach to reducing the economic losses caused by future disaster events can be found in the Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team (IHMT). The IHMT Report is an effort to incorporate the background and expertise of officials of every level of government in order to promote a comprehensive approach to hazard loss reduction.

The IHMT recommendations are intended to provide the framework for hazard mitigation activities and guide the agencies involved in the recovery and reconstruction process. Although the mitigation recommendations were developed by multiple agencies, the implementation is the responsibility of the lead agencies designated for the recommendations. The recommendations describe the action, time-line, and potential funding sources. This IHMT Report serves multiple objectives by guiding the Idaho Hazard Mitigation Plan as well as serving as the document to launch specific projects through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. The report will also transmit the IHMT recommendations to the FEMA Regional Director, the Governor’s Authorized Representative, local, State and Federal governmental agencies and the general public. The recommendations developed by the IHMT share the necessity of a coordinated, multi-objective approach to mitigation among all agencies and the public.

Following a federal disaster declaration, the Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team is activated to accomplish some or all of the following:

The Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team for the 1997 Idaho Flood Disaster in southeast Idaho convened in Idaho Falls on July 16, 1997. This report is the product of this intergovernmental team meeting.

DISASTER DECLARATION

On April 14, 1997, Governor Batt requested a joint federal, state and local survey of damaged areas. In the north, preliminary assessments indicated the most severe impacts were to the county road systems due to landslides and washouts. Based on these preliminary damage assessments, the Governor requested federal assistance. On June 13, the President declared emergency disaster assistance for the northern counties of Benewah, Bonner, Boundary, Kootenai, and Shoshone Counties for the flooding that occurred March 14^th through June 30^th.

In the southeast, the extensive damages caused by the Snake River flood had not been seen since the Teton Dam failed 21 years ago. On July 2^nd, the declaration for DR-1177-ID was amended to include the southeast Idaho counties of Bingham, Bonneville, Custer, Fremont, Jefferson, and Madison for Public Assistance (Infrastructure) and Mitigation. On July 3^rd, Governor Batt requested Individual Assistance (Human Services) be added to the declaration for Jefferson and Bingham counties. This request was approved on July 22^nd. On July 25, 1997, Butte County was added to the declaration for Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation—increasing the statewide total declared counties to twelve.

CURRENT STATUS OF THE DECLARATIONS BY COUNTY

Counties	Region	Individual Assistance/ Human Services	Public Assistance/ Infrastructure Support	Hazard Mitigation
Benewah	North	NA	6/13/97	6/13/97
Bingham	Southeast	7/22/97	7/3/97	7/3/97
Bonner	North	NA	6/13/97	6/13/97
Bonneville	Southeast	NA	7/3/97	7/3/97
Boundary	North	NA	6/13/97	6/13/97
Butte	Southeast	NA	7/25/97	7/25/97
Custer	Southeast	NA	7/3/97	7/3/97
Fremont	Southeast	NA	7/3/97	7/3/97
Jefferson	Southeast	7/22/97	7/3/97	7/3/97
Kootenai	North	NA	6/13/97	6/13/97
Madison	Southeast	7/25/97	7/3/97	7/3/97
Shoshone	North	NA	6/13/97	6/13/97
TOTALS		3	12	12

Mitigation Recommendations

The following mitigation recommendations were developed by Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team (IHMT) members and are intended to be long term solutions to reduce southeast Idaho’s vulnerability to the impacts of future flood disasters.

All of these recommendations will require close interagency cooperation and comprehensive planning, and may require changes in legislation, rule revision, or amendment to codes for full implementation. The recommendations listed on the following pages will provide a framework for the State Hazard Mitigation Plan, and should be used as well by local governments when developing options to reduce future damages.

Each recommendation is divided into three parts:

A statement of the recommendation

A brief background of the issue

A list of agencies to carry-out and/or fund the recommendation along with a schedule of completion A total of 18 recommendations are presented under the following five categories:

Waterways & Watershed Management

Background: Peak flows along the Henry’s Fork in the 1980s and 1990s have been higher than pre-1960 peak flows. An analysis of historical precipitation data should be compared with stream gage data on the Henry’s Fork to determine if weather patterns alone have contributed to the increased runoff or if land-use practices in the watershed have exacerbated flows.

Background: Large scale dredging has proven to be cost prohibitive, ecologically disruptive, and ineffective in reducing peak flows. However, there is an immediate need to identify and remove in-channel debris and sediment in particular sites especially where these deposits threaten essential infrastructure. Bridges, culverts and diversion structures should be routinely inspected and periodically cleaned. Care should be taken when removing stream detritus as it provides aquatic habitat and bank stabilization.

Support Agencies: Local governments, Idaho Department of Water Resources and US Army Corps of Engineers

Background: The cornerstone of flood loss reduction is the local community flood mitigation plan. The most successful plans are those that coordinate flood loss reduction with other community needs and goals to develop a stronger, more comprehensive program. As a result of sound mitigation planning, many communities across the country have lessened the social and economic costs of flooding while enhancing the quality of life of their citizens. In addition, local mitigation plans are now required by FEMA as a condition of receiving certain grant monies to carryout mitigation projects. To assist local communities in mitigation plan development, the State of Idaho should conduct mitigation plan training for local officials particularly in those communities that have suffered recent severe flooding.

Support Agencies: Federal Emergency Management Agency and Idaho Department of Water Resources

Funding: Bureau of Disaster Services and the Federal Emergency Management Agency

Background: To be effective, water resource and flood mitigation solutions should be carried-out by local officials/citizens and be basin wide in scope. Existing Watershed Advisory Groups and Flood Control Districts in the area, coupled with a dedicated cadre of State and Federal water resource experts, should form a larger umbrella group dedicated to long-range study and project management to reduce future flood damages throughout the Snake River drainage. A Watershed Advisory Group or a local Council of Government can undertake leadership of the planning process. Many of the recommendations outlined in this report could be addressed by this group, perhaps with the ultimate goal of designating a certain reach of the Snake River as "Wild and Scenic".

Support Agencies: Henry’s Fork, South Fork Snake River, and Blackfoot River Watershed Councils, Flood Control Districts, Bureau of Disaster Services, Southeast Idaho Council of Governments, and the East Central Idaho Planning and Development Association

Funding: Idaho Department of Water Resources, Bureau of Disaster Services, & existing resources

Background: Stabilizing existing degraded streambanks can, in many instances, greatly reduce future flood damages. Many homeowners lost property to the floodwaters and are now in peril of losing their homes should another significant flood occur. Roads are similarly affected by recent channel migrations and need to be protected. Stabilization of the channel must be done in such a way as to maximize both flood protection and fisheries habitat. The use of vegetative bank-protection works should be a priority in any stabilization project.

Lead Agencies: Natural Resources Conservation Service and Soil Conservation Districts

Support Agencies: Idaho Department of Water Resources and US Army Corps of Engineers

Background: Dry Bed is the old channel of the Snake River. During peak flows, water could be diverted into the channel to spread out the discharge and thereby lessen the impact of flooding on the Snake River. Before this could be successful, classification of Dry Bed as to whether it is canal, natural stream, or river channel would be required. Classification affects stream and canal regulations, water use, as well as building and zoning regulations. Clarification will elucidate responsibilities regarding the application of appropriate land use and building regulations.

Public Information

Background: Insuring one’s property from future flood loss is the underpinning of individual flood mitigation. The more properties that are insured, the less the economic costs of flooding are born by the taxpayers at large through governments at every level. Local communities are best suited to target particular areas to "sell" flood insurance and should be encouraged to do so. The Bureau of Disaster Services should take the lead in encouraging local jurisdictions to work in concert with the media to develop and promote awareness of the NFIP on a continuing basis.

Lead Agencies: Bureau of Disaster Services and Idaho Department of Water Resources

Background: Property owners can greatly lessen future flood damages to their homes by utilizing a whole range of floodproofing options. In areas subject to slow-moving, shallow flooding, buildings can be elevated or barriers can be constructed to block the water’s approach or entry into the building. FEMA, ARC, USACE, IDWR and others have published many useful floodproofing technical brochures and manuals. This information should be made available to every property owner in flood hazard areas.

Support Agencies: Bureau of Disaster Services, Idaho Department of Water Resources and County Emergency Services and Planning Departments

Infrastructure

Background: Levee failures caused extensive damage to public facilities and homes along the Snake River. In order to better coordinate the rehabilitation of flood control works among various state and federal agencies, a Levee Task Force will convene. Aside from ownership and funding issues, we recommend that the Levee Task Force address the following: Alternatives to levee repair where practicable, technical advice on proper levee management, and assistance in forming levee districts.

Support Agencies: US Army Corps of Engineers, Idaho Department of Water Resources, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Levee Districts, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency

Background: The design of many older bridges do not meet current engineering standards and are thus more susceptible to failure in the event of a disaster. An assessment should be made of bridges and overpasses in flood hazard areas to identify the potential for damage or failure during the base flood discharge. The assessment should identify those transportation structures at risk and develop appropriate retrofitting options. More specifically, plans are currently underway to elevate a portion of Interstate 15 near Blackfoot. This project must be fully analyzed and mitigation measures should be incorporated into its design and construction.

Support Agencies: County Highway Departments, Federal Highway Administration

Background: During the flooding along the Snake and Teton Rivers, several diversion structures were damaged. The diversions direct water into the headgate especially during low water flows. In some cases, these diversion structures were built out into the river channel of the Snake or totally across the south fork of the Teton River acting like dams in order to keep water levels high enough to flow into the headgate. Many diversion structures get blocked with debris and cause the river to carve a new channel around the diversion. Some diversion structures in the Snake River may actually have caused the channel to migrate away from the headgate by causing debris and sediment to build up.

Resources, US Army Corps of Engineers, Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Resource Conservation Service, Farm Services Administration and the Bureau of Land Management

Background: Canal channels are incapable of dramatically reducing peak flows along the Snake River. However, canals may be used to route some floodwaters into low or depleted aquifers. This method has been successful in Southern Idaho at American Falls Reservoir. Excess Snake River water is diverted to lava rock areas and into lava tubes which deliver the water directly to the aquifer.

Support Agencies: Canal Companies, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, Idaho Department of Lands, and Division of Environmental Quality

Funding: Idaho Department of Water Resources and Department of Environmental Quality

Background: Non-compliance with local codes and ordinances was apparent in some locations. Most mobile homes damaged were not located on permanent foundations and lacked proper anchoring. Many homes are simply built too close to the river or not sufficiently elevated. In some areas there appeared to be a lack of adequate site planning. Local governments should re-evaluate current codes in light of this flood event and explore the option of increasing their inspection and compliance resources.

Support Agencies: Idaho Department of Building and Safety and Bureau of Disaster Services

Background: Comprehensive plans and land-use plans specify the types of development in a community and where development should or should not occur. These plans help to tailor land use with the land’s hazards. For instance, flood hazard areas can be used for parks, wildlife refuges, golf courses or similar uses that are compatible with the natural flooding process. Plans like this can help shape other local measures, such as zoning ordinances and capital improvement projects. Some examples of land-use/zoning controls to lessen flood damages along the Snake River may include basement exclusion ordinances in areas prone to subsurface flooding, separate floodplain zoning districts and development setbacks.

Background: The State of Idaho can reduce flood disaster response and recovery costs by enacting legislation that will encourage wise development in the floodplain. A law mandating the disclosure of the flood threat on all real estate transactions would assist property owners in making informed decisions in the marketplace. Homeowners that are aware of potential flooding are more prone to take measures to safeguard their property from flood damages, since it is in their best economic interest to do so. This increase in individual flood mitigation will decrease disaster response and recovery costs for governments at every level.

In addition, the Idaho State Legislature should strengthen the state’s commitment to the principles of wise floodplain development through support of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Currently, only one state staff person is assigned to assist the 155 Idaho communities that participate in the NFIP. In most communities, the only mechanism that exists to ensure that structures are built properly is the local floodplain management ordinance. Local governments simply need more help in the administration of their flood ordinance. Additional State NFIP staff are cost effective since they work to avoid future economic loss.

Support Agencies: Idaho Department of Water Resources and the State Real Estate Board

Background: During this flood there were numerous episodes of high ground water and infiltration from floods overcoming septic and sewage systems, forcing effluent into homes, causing physical damage and health concerns. Back-flow valves should be required, at a minimum, for all new commercial and residential construction in the floodplain.

Mapping and Analyses

Background: Frequencies of the June 1997 floods are needed for several reaches of the Snake River and major tributaries downstream from Palisades Reservoir. The flood frequencies are an integral part of information needed to: (1) design replacement facilities for those that were destroyed or damaged beyond repair by the flood; (2) evaluate the cost-effectiveness of hazard mitigation proposals for public facilities damaged by the flood; (3) evaluate or revise existing flood insurance rate maps; and, (4) aid city, county and state managers with land-use decisions. The Task Force will identify the methods of analysis and data to be used in defining the flood frequencies, analyze the data, and distribute flood frequency information to interested parties.

Support Agencies: US Army Corps of Engineers, US Geological Survey, and US Bureau of Reclamation, Idaho Department of Water Resources, Natural Resources Conservation Service

Background: Delineation of areas actually inundated is far more accurate and has much greater utility to planners and regulators than floodplain maps developed by computer-simulation techniques. Furthermore, the maps of areas that were actually inundated can be used to calibrate computer models that can simulate floodplains for floods with a different discharge and frequency than the June 1997 flood.

Small scale satellite images and aerial photos taken during the peak of the flood will be overlaid on a large base map and distributed to local and state officials. These maps could especially aid local planners and building officials in encouraging wise floodplain land-use decisions.

Support Agencies: Idaho Department of Water Resources and Bureau of Disaster Services

- A Chronology -

There have been twenty-four (24) disasters in Idaho since the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) or its predecessor agency began tracking them in 1953. Included in the list are sixteen floods, four forest fires, two landslides, a drought, an earthquake, an ice jam, a mine fire, a dam collapse, and fall-out from volcanic ash. The following table shows the date, incident, and type of assistance for each Federally declared disaster in Idaho:

Note - Hazard Mitigation was also declared for the last several disasters as well.

FEDERAL DISASTER PROGRAMS
program	agency	eligibility	assistance
Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMGP or 404). Designed for long term mitigation projects	FEMA Hazard Mitigation	State & local governments, non-profit organizations, and Native Americans	75% FEMA share, 25% non-federal share grants
Public Assistance designed to restore public infrastructure	FEMA Infrastructure Support	State & local Governments, non –profit organizations and Native Americans	75% FEMA share, 25 % non-federal share grants
Emergency Watershed Protection. Emergency repair of levees and structures; channel clearance; protection of eroding stream banks	Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA, NRCS)	Public and private landowners represented by a project sponsor (public agency)	75% NRCS, 25% Sponsor share
Emergency Conservation Program for rehab of farmland, debris removal, & water conservation	Consolidated Farm Services Agency (CFSA) & U.S. Dept of Agriculture (USDA)	Eligible agricultural producers	CFSA will provide up to 64% cost share of project, balance to be funded by farmers or ranchers
PL-566, Small Watershed Protection Program. Construct flood protection projects and land treatment	Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA, NRCS)	State, regional an local governments	100% grants for structural projects, 75% for non- structural projects
Cooperative River Basin Program appraises water sheds and land resources for conservation planning	Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA, NRCS)	Federal, State, regional & local governments	Technical assistance
Floodplain Management Services for Floodplain Mapping, Flood Warning & Preparedness Planning, Technical Assistance (Sec. 206)	U.S. Army Corps of Engineers	Local/ State governments, Indian Tribes, Water Districts	Varies with type of services
Partners for Wildlife provides funds for improvement and protection of fish and wildlife habit on private lands	U.S. Fish & Wildlife	Private citizens and corporations	Approx. 50/50 cost share with USF&W providing supplies and landowner will do actual restoration

FEDERAL DISASTER PROGRAMS
program	agency	eligibility	assistance
Planing Assistance to States to support any water resource issue analysis related to state water plan (Sec. 22)	U.S. Army Corps of Engineers	Local/State government, Native American Tribes, Water Districts	50/50 cost share
PL 84-99 Rehabilitation of Flood Control Structures damaged by flooding	U.S. Army Corps of Engineers	State or Political subdivisions	Repair to pre-flood condition , cost share may apply
Small Flood Control Projects for flood prevention (Sec. 205)	U.S. Army Corps of Engineers	Local/State Governments, Native American Tribes, Water Districts	Projects up to $5 million per project 75/25 % cost share
Channel Clearing for Flood Control to remove debris & gravel (Sec. 208)	U.S. Army Corps of Engineers	Local/State Governments, Native American Tribes, Water Districts	Projects up to $500,000 75/25 % cost share
Emergency Streambank and Shoreline Protection to prevent erosion from damage to public and non-profit facilities (Sec. 14)	U.S. Army Corps of Engineers	Local/State Governments, Native American Tribes, Water Districts	Projects up to $500,000 75/25 % cost share
Soil an Water Loans to develop wells, terraces, waterways, control erosion, and build dikes	Rural Economic and Community Development Services (formerly FMHA)	Owners and operators of farms and ranches	1 % loans
HR 2667 Emergency Farm Loans to assist where physical damage affects farming, ranching or aquaculture	Rural Economic and Community Development Services	Farmers, ranchers, and aquaculture operators	4.5 % loans
SBA Disaster Loans to help rebuild and recover after a disaster. Assists in damaged real and personal property	U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA)	Homeowners, Renters and Businesses of all sizes and private non-profit organizations	Low interest, long-term loans with various terms
Community Development Block Grant	Housing and Urban Development	Non-Entitlement Cities and Counties	Varied cost shared grants

Incident	Date Declared	Type of Assistance
Flooding	April 21, 1956	IA and PA
Flooding	May 27, 1957	IA and PA
Forest Fires	July 22, 1960	IA and PA
Flooding	June 26, 1961	IA and PA
Flooding	February 14, 1962	IA and PA
Flooding	February 15, 1963	IA and PA
Flooding	December 31, 1964	IA and PA
Flooding	September 25, 1965	IA and PA
Forest Fires	August 30, 1967	IA and PA
Severe Storms / Flooding	March 2, 1972	Emergency PA
Sunshine Silver Mine Fire	May 17, 1972	IA and PA
Severe Storms / Flooding	January 25, 1974	IA and PA
Dam Collapse, Flooding	June 6, 1976	IA and PA
Drought	May 5, 1977	PA
Wilson Creek Fire	August 20, 1977	Fire Suppression
20-Mile Fire	August 8, 1979	Fire Suppression
Flooding	April 9, 1980	IA and PA
Mt. St. Helens eruption	May 22, 1980	IA and PA
Earthquake	November 18, 1983	IA and PA
Ice Jams and Flooding	February 16, 1984	IA and PA
Flash Flooding	July 26, 1991	IA and PA
Severe Storms/Flooding	February 11, 1996	IA and PA
Flooding / Mud / Landslide	January 4, 1997	IA and PA
Flooding / Mud / Landslide	June 13, 1997	IA and PA

MITIGATION STRATEGIES AND ACTION - 1177

Introduction

Overview

Purpose

Team Activities

DISASTER DECLARATION

CURRENT STATUS OF THE DECLARATIONS BY COUNTY

Mitigation Recommendations

Waterways & Watershed Management

Public Information

Infrastructure

Mapping and Analyses

Historical Idaho Disaster Declarations

- A Chronology -

FEDERAL DISASTER PROGRAMS

FEDERAL DISASTER PROGRAMS