Flood Mitigation EEPA STUDENT WORK

Flood Mitigation in Roslyn city Explaining Evidence of the Performance of Alternatives (EEPA) STUDENT WORK [30 points] See the EEPA INSTRUCTIONS AND RUBRIC document for further instructions. Fill in the yellow boxes, save this file with your name in the file extension, upload to Canvas by Oct 20 midnight. Remember to answer the EEPA keeping in mind the Roslyn City context including precipitation, current policy, current irrigation practices and NRD budget. Name: ____Elsie Woerner ___________________ Team Name: ___Zoo Crew ______________ Assignment Group ( highlight the one you are assigned in gray): ASSIGNMENT GROUP A - Alternative A (Education, no policy action) (Do not take any policy level mitigative action; only undertake different educative and awareness generation initiatives) x Objective 1 (reduce the impact of flooding). - Alternative A (Education, no policy action) (Do not take any policy level mitigative action; only undertake different educative and awareness generation initiatives) x Objective 2 (ensure equity/fairness) ASSIGNMENT GROUP B - Alternative B (Acquire properties/ buyouts) (Acquiring or buying out properties at flood-risk zone by the government and relocating the population at safer place. Using the acquired space as open space/park so that the space can act as barrier against flooding) x Objective 1 (reduce the impact of flooding) - Alternative B (Acquire properties/ buyouts) (Acquiring or buying out properties at flood-risk zone by the government and relocating the population at safer place. Using the acquired space as open space/park so that the space can act as barrier against flooding) x Objective 2 (ensure equity/fairness) ASSIGNMENT GROUP C - Alternative C (Adopting structural mitigation measures) (constructing levees, dikes, dams and different flood control structures) x Objective 1 (reduce the impact of flooding) - Alternative C (Adopting structural mitigation measures) (constructing levees, dikes, dams and different flood control structures) x Objective 2 (ensure equity/fairness) ASSIGNMENT GROUP D - Alternative D (Enhancing natural system protection) ( Using natural areas, rooftop gardens, rain barrels, green landscaping techniques, and creating a green infrastructure system as part of the overall stormwater management plan. Use of protected wetlands and focusing on nature-based solutions—such as reconnecting floodplains to rivers.) x Objective 1 (reduce the impact of flooding) - Alternative D (Enhancing natural system protection) ( Using natural areas, rooftop

gardens, rain barrels, green landscaping techniques, and creating a green infrastructure system as part of the overall stormwater management plan. Use of protected wetlands and focusing on nature-based solutions—such as reconnecting floodplains to rivers.) x Objective 2 (ensure equity/fairness) Objective 1: Impact of flooding is reduced 1) [2.5 points] Find evidence that relates to your assigned alternative beyond the resources that your instructors provided. What evidence did you find? Give a summary of the evidence you found that explains if the assigned alternative meets the objective: I found an article released by the USDA on a buyout program called the EWP buyout option. This program buys properties in floodplains that are at risk of becoming damaged by a flood and then destroying them. The land is then returned to its natural state, with the increased area of natural land helping absorb the excess water in a flood. There is less damage to property when this program is put into place because the property in the floodplains is replaced with land that can act as a water absorption area. The evidence presented in the article meets the objective of reducing the impact of flooding because it shows a clear demonstration of how we can use government funding to reduce the impact of flooding on homes and properties. Give a traceable and detailed citation in APA format: USDA. (2023, August 15). Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) Program Buyouts | Natural Resources Conservation Service . Www.nrcs.usda.gov. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs- initiatives/emergency-watershed-protection-ewp-program-buyouts#:~:text=Buyouts%20are %20effective%20in%20preventing 2) [2.5 points] How does this evidence relate to your assigned alternative and objective? You will need to think carefully about the relevance of the information that you found. The evidence you find should help your explanation in at least one of two ways. The evidence should either: a) help explain a mechanism for HOW or WHY the Alternative (e.g., Education, no policy action) affects an Objective (e.g., impact of flooding is reduced), OR b) help explain HOW MUCH the Objective may be satisfied by an Alternative (in other words, how much impact of flooding would be reduced, or not reduced, if no new policy action were taken and resources were focused on educational resources and awareness generation activities?).

drainage source or turning it into community spaces that will have little to no damage if flooded, we will begin to reduce the damage that is caused by flooding in the community of Rosalyn. Cite all the sources you used in your explanation, including ones provided by the instructor, with a full APA formatted citation: USDA. (2023, August 15). Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) Program Buyouts | Natural Resources Conservation Service . Www.nrcs.usda.gov. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs- initiatives/emergency-watershed-protection-ewp-program-buyouts#:~:text=Buyouts%20are %20effective%20in%20preventing Zavar, E. (2015). Residential perspectives: the value of Floodplain‐ buyout open space. Geographical Review , 105 (1), 78–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1931-0846.2014.12047.x Objective 2: Equity/fairness is ensured 1) [2.5 points] Find evidence that relates to your assigned alternative beyond the resources that your instructors provided. What evidence did you find? Give a summary of the evidence you found that explains if the assigned alternative meets the objective: Because of the location, flood zones have cheaper rent. Minorities also are more likely to live in flood zones, with flood zones mainly being Black and Hispanic populations (Bakkensen, 2020). Flood insurance is also harder for people living in flood zones to obtain because of the costs. If my alternative was implemented, it would not meet the objective of being equal and fair to everyone. Buyouts would push these families out and specifically target minority groups who live in the flood zone, making it unequal. Give a traceable and detailed citation in APA format: Bakkensen, L. (2020, October 2). Black and Hispanic People More Likely to Live in High-Risk Flood Zones, Study Finds . University of Arizona News. https://news.arizona.edu/story/black-and- hispanic-people-more-likely-live-high-risk-flood-zones-study-finds 2) [2.5 points] How does this evidence relate to your assigned alternative and objective? You will need to think carefully about the relevance of the information that you found. The evidence you find should help your explanation in at least one of two ways. The evidence should either:

a) a) help explain a mechanism for HOW or WHY the Alternative (e.g., Education, no policy action) affects an Objective (e.g., impact of flooding is reduced), OR b) help explain HOW MUCH the Objective may be satisfied by an Alternative (in other words, how much impact of flooding would be reduced, or not reduced, if no new policy action were taken and resources were focused on educational resources and awareness generation activities?). The evidence I found will (circle or bold at least one): a) help explain a mechanism for how or why equity and fairness will be ensured b) explain how much equity and fairness will or will not be ensured (i.e., how much of an impact does the Alternative have on ensuring equity and fairness?) c) both Why? What does this evidence help you explain? This evidence helps explain who would be affected if buyouts were implemented. The homes bought out would belong to mainly minority groups with lower incomes who might find it harder to find cheap housing elsewhere. They would then be forced out of their homes and have to find somewhere else to live, which would not be fair. This means that buyouts would not meet the objective of being fair and equal for everyone involved. 3) [10 points] If your assigned alternative is implemented, will it result in ensuring equity and fairness? Explain using the evidence provided by instructors AND the additional evidence you found. Explanation: If my assigned alternative was implemented, it would not meet the objective of being fair and equal for everyone. When looking at the populations of floodplains, they are mainly people of minorities, specifically Blacks and Hispanics (Bakkensen, 2020). Floodplain housing is also cheaper. These people would then be forced out of their homes and have to find different affordable housing elsewhere which they might not find. In Nebraska, a majority of the people who live in floodplains also rent out their housing and do not own it (Paine, 2020). When the housing would be bought out from the renters, the people who actually live in the homes would receive zero financial gain and be left without a home or money to go find another one. They would receive zero benefits from a buyout as well. Although buyouts work well to minimize the damage done by flooding, they are not fair and equal for everyone involved. Minorities would specifically be targeted in buyouts and so would people who rent their homes. They would receive the short end of the stick and be left without homes or even a place to go.