” …Controlling flood waters through local dams and reservoirs has been controversial.
People who live lakeside often don’t like to see the water lowered by their vacation properties. And then there is the risk that if local authorities hold flood water too long, the water will either back up and flood properties upstream or surge forward and overcome the dam—causing a worse flood. … ”
The only sensible solution is the one that has the lesser negative impact on the community overall, not one that lessens the aesthetic properties of the … FEW properties alongside the artificial lake. If residents with lakeside properties want to have water near their property all year round, they can sell and buy property near a natural lake. As I do not own artificial lakeside property, I don’t give a dam what they do. Drain the Reservoir!
What is not addressed within this article is that this reservoir is the primary source of water for the City of Jackson and other nearby communities. It is self funding through residential and business leases, timber sales, water & sewer, campgrounds, etc. The vast majority of its funding comes from leaseholds on which approximately 6000 homes are built. These homeowners pay an additional annual leasehold fee that may run from $500 to several thousand depending on the property. There is also infrastructure on the lake owned by both residents and businesses that is damaged by low water events. Floating piers, particularly those with roofs or covers, are damaged when settling on to uneven lake bottom. Long submerged seawalls are damaged when exposed. Boats resting on lake bottom are damaged. Businesses relying on recreation see a large drop in business. It’s not just a case of selfish rich people don’t care about those downstream of them. Very few of the residents within the district can be considered rich. We are just willing to pay more to live close to or on the water. We want to help our neighbors when we can but to suggest that PRVWSD residents’ expectations of recreational opportunities on the lake should be of no consequence so the Reservoir’s primary functions can be morphed into a poorly functioning flood control structure to protect residents in flood zones downstream is a knee jerk reaction at best. I don’t see my neighbors and I continuing to pay leasehold fees for the privilege of living on the edge of a mud hole. The Pearl River is a narrow winding river through low lying terrain. There is no terrain suitable for a large flood control lake like Grenada or Sardis. The One Lake project is a joke as a flood control device. It’s a development scheme to get taxpayers to create waterfront property for the well connected. Flood control isn’t rich people getting richer on the banks of Jackson. Flood control on the Pearl will have to start at its tributaries. Flood waters in the basin are reaching the river too quickly. The tributaries need to be able to hold water back. We need diversions upstream and downstream to flood plains. We need to ensure pinch points within the waterway are widened.
” …Controlling flood waters through local dams and reservoirs has been controversial.
People who live lakeside often don’t like to see the water lowered by their vacation properties. And then there is the risk that if local authorities hold flood water too long, the water will either back up and flood properties upstream or surge forward and overcome the dam—causing a worse flood. … ”
The only sensible solution is the one that has the lesser negative impact on the community overall, not one that lessens the aesthetic properties of the … FEW properties alongside the artificial lake. If residents with lakeside properties want to have water near their property all year round, they can sell and buy property near a natural lake. As I do not own artificial lakeside property, I don’t give a dam what they do. Drain the Reservoir!
What is not addressed within this article is that this reservoir is the primary source of water for the City of Jackson and other nearby communities. It is self funding through residential and business leases, timber sales, water & sewer, campgrounds, etc. The vast majority of its funding comes from leaseholds on which approximately 6000 homes are built. These homeowners pay an additional annual leasehold fee that may run from $500 to several thousand depending on the property. There is also infrastructure on the lake owned by both residents and businesses that is damaged by low water events. Floating piers, particularly those with roofs or covers, are damaged when settling on to uneven lake bottom. Long submerged seawalls are damaged when exposed. Boats resting on lake bottom are damaged. Businesses relying on recreation see a large drop in business. It’s not just a case of selfish rich people don’t care about those downstream of them. Very few of the residents within the district can be considered rich. We are just willing to pay more to live close to or on the water. We want to help our neighbors when we can but to suggest that PRVWSD residents’ expectations of recreational opportunities on the lake should be of no consequence so the Reservoir’s primary functions can be morphed into a poorly functioning flood control structure to protect residents in flood zones downstream is a knee jerk reaction at best. I don’t see my neighbors and I continuing to pay leasehold fees for the privilege of living on the edge of a mud hole. The Pearl River is a narrow winding river through low lying terrain. There is no terrain suitable for a large flood control lake like Grenada or Sardis. The One Lake project is a joke as a flood control device. It’s a development scheme to get taxpayers to create waterfront property for the well connected. Flood control isn’t rich people getting richer on the banks of Jackson. Flood control on the Pearl will have to start at its tributaries. Flood waters in the basin are reaching the river too quickly. The tributaries need to be able to hold water back. We need diversions upstream and downstream to flood plains. We need to ensure pinch points within the waterway are widened.