The Fall 1972 Lake Erie Floods and Their Significance to Resources Management*

Abstract

RESEARCH on human adjustments to 1972 and earlier floods in the Rondeau-Erieau and Pelee-East Marsh areas (Figure 1) on the north coast of Lake Erie reveals:1. That significant ecological elements and processes associated with flooding are not well understood by resource managers and the public.2. That a relatively narrow range of expensive engineering (structural) adjustments has been used in attempts to control flooding and related ecological elements and processes.3. That such adjustments have generally been introduced in a crisis atmosphere, during periods of high-water level on Lake Erie. 4. That financial and institutional arrangements have been developed to support perpetuation of engineering adjustments, notably by spreading their cost among increasing numbers of Canadian taxpayers.5. That no detailed evaluation of the economic, social, or biophysical (environmental) benefits and costs of these adjustments has been undertaken by any government agency associated with their use.6 . That engineering adjustments generally appear to be justified on the grounds that they promote food and agricultural production, but without adequatc evaluation of: ( 1 ) returns which could be derived from comparable public investment elsewhere (opportunity costs) ; ( 2 ) the discriminatory character of the investments; ( 3 ) the recreation and environmental costs of using engineering adjustments, or the "technicological fix"; (4) alternative adjustments, including land use controls.A number of recommendations are made as a result of our research: 1. Impending large-scale diking and other engineering projects especially on marsh lands along the north Erie shore, Lake St Clair, and the Lower Thames should not go forward until detailed benefit-cost and environmental impact studies are carried out and further careful consideration has been given to hazard insurance, land use controls, and other alternative adjustments. I 0 6 30 FIGURE 1. Rondeau-Erieau and Pelee-East Marsh study areas. The arrows indicate the direction of erosion and depos THEFALL 1 9 7 2 L A K E E R l E F L O O D S 37 3.No large-scale drainage, flood, or erosion control schemes should be undertaken in Ontario in future without evaluating a wide range of alternative adjustments and their economic, social, and environmental benefits and costs in the manner just described. 4. A detailed review of policy, legislation, and institutional arrangements relating to drainage, flood, erosion, and other adjustments should be initiated in the near future, notably with respect to coastal lands. In this review, especially careful consideration should be given to: ( 1 ) reducing the proportion of senior government financial subsidy for structural and other hazard adjustments; (2) introducing guidelines for the use of senior government hazard funds at the municipal level.5 . Consideration should also be given to other policy and institutional changes, including: ( 1 ) public purchase or land use control of coastal lands identified as very susceptible to flooding, erosion, and mars...

Assessing land‐use regulations in coastal wetlands: The case of the long point area, lake Erie, Ontario

“…The effectiveness of federal and provincial emergency programs to assist individuals and municipalities following the extensive damage caused by the 1972-1975 Great Lakes high-water period was previously assessed in three studies. 2 Prior to discussing the experience of the Haldimand-Norfolk Region in managing Lake Erie coastal development, a review of related research is presented. These studies were selected as examples of the evaluations of coastal regulatory processes.…”

Coastal Processes and Shoreline Encroachment: Implications for Shoreline Management in Ontario

“…Attempts to reduce hazard losses by shore protection have been costly and heavily subsidized, with federal-provincial contributions of up to 90 per cent. Some of these contributions to municipal and private shore protection were made with few guidelines to ensure that funds were spent effectively (Nelson et al 1975;Day et a1 1977;Kreutzwiser 1979). Protection works, especially those constructed privately, are not always effective over the longer term in preventing damage.…”

“…Protection works, especially those constructed privately, are not always effective over the longer term in preventing damage. Moreover, protection encourages continued occupance of hazard land, invariably necessitating subsequent expenditures on protection (Nelson et al 1975).…”

“…And while programs facilitating shore protection are generally acceptable to shore property owners, these programs sometimes generate local controversy. Such was the case with the ARDA dyking program at Rondeau on Lake Erie, where cottagers were bitterly opposed to dyke construction on their properties aimed primarily at protecting farmland (Nelson et al 1975).…”

“…Clearly, emphasis has been on structural adjustments to flooding, erosion, and other shore problems on the lower Great Lakes and elsewhere. While numerous studies have called for consideration of a broader range of adjustments (for example, Nelson et al 1975;Day et al 1977;Kreutzwiser, 1982), progress toward using a broader range has been limited. Only occasional use has been made of public acquisition of hazard land, and programs for the relocation of hazard-susceptible dwellings are virtually non-existent (Day et al 1977).…”