Forums » Local & National Politics

All Forums:  Advertisers | Book Club | Community Watch | General Discussion | Politics | Recipes | Support     New Topics & Replies

Levee Protection

    • 1140 posts
    51
    December 21, 2015 12:49:32 PM PST
    You and I agree on one thing cleanup, they should indeed have moved the Linda Levee back from the original riverbed and the river run her natural course. Of course that would meant removing houses, yours included, to make room. I'm sure as the caring former President of RD 784 you would be willing to make that sacrifice. After we don't want a repeat of the Feb 1986 event now do we? At least this is your non expert assertion.

    Again you have experts supporting your claims about the levee issues or legal troubles. Interestingly the people in your district didn't you were well suited to hold elected office as a supervisor. You also failed to meet the minimum qualifications to run for Sheriff.

    Happy Holidays to one and all.

    • 6429 posts
    52
    December 22, 2015 12:12:05 PM PST
    Oh, I forgot, TRLIA also failed to do a project near the Highway 70 bridge placing cobble stones along the waterside of the YUba as Marysville did on their side, also TRLIA failed to place boulders along the levee under the bridge to protect against erosion in addition to these below , when you add all of them together, you might think someone wants the levee to fail again.The original plan was to upgrade the YUba River South bank levee and they had developers funding that plan in return for the right to develop property's.

    However after starting the upgrade they ran into the boulders while digging the ditch for slurry wall, could not dig through the Rocks. The second part of the Yuba River levee upgrade was to construct Boulders just under the highway 70 bridge, construct Cobble stones along the water side for 400 feet to stop windwash and high water flows from eroding out the levee, and to flatten out the levee sides to a 3x1 slope, again to address erosion. However, since they could not dig through the boulders, they did not do any of the upgrades the developers paid for and after the developers found out that, they pulled out.

    So, they had many many millions to move the levee off the old river beds they chose to add on to the work by moving to the Bear River , then returning to the Yuba River levee and began work from the Union Pacific RailRoad east to the Simpson Lane Road Levee area.

    They constructed seepage berms on the land side , a partial slurry wall. from 2004 through 2009 when they finally in 2009 flattened the waterside of the levee.

    They left the work under the highway 70 bridge , the work along the waterside east of the highway , undone and to this day, it is still undone.

    Who will we blame? I would start with The Board of Supervisors in 2003, the County Administrator, the people who originated TRLIA in 2004, and the engineers who still to this day say the Yuba River South bank levee is certified, even though there is not now and never was a foundation under that levee to certify as strong enough to keep the levee stable. That was proven by expert engineer witnesses in the Paterno Law suit.
    • 6429 posts
    53
    December 22, 2015 12:35:15 PM PST
    "You and I agree on one thing cleanup, they should indeed have moved the Linda Levee back from the original riverbed and the river run her natural course. Of course that would meant removing houses, yours included, to make room. I'm sure as the caring former President of RD 784 you would be willing to make that sacrifice. After we don't want a repeat of the Feb 1986 event now do we? At least this is your non expert assertion."

    The County in 1934 took over the levees without upgrading, just added the deficient non designed mound into their designed levees. That was one of the reasons the State had to pay Millions in damages to the people.

    Again, in 2004 the county who had joined with RD 784 received millions from developers to fix the South Bank levee , but chose to spend the millions elsewhere, That will of course repeat the 1986 law suit with the state, county and certain Engineering firms being sued.
    • 4977 posts
    54
    December 22, 2015 2:25:56 PM PST
    Are you saying the only course of action is to wait for another flood and hope the levee breaks at the 86 breech location?
    What are you doing to bring about action other than complaining?
    Why haven't you found a legal entity that can publicly certify the levee at the '86 breech site is deficient? How much does it cost to get this legal opinion that the levee is deficient? If the cost is reasonable, you might get enough residents to kick in to make it happen.

    Can you do this?
    • 6429 posts
    55
    December 22, 2015 3:18:33 PM PST
    Any one of the levee defects TRLIA failed to construct can cause a levee failure, any one.
    • 4977 posts
    56
    December 22, 2015 3:29:44 PM PST
    Are you trying to get something done yourself or are you just trying to throw stuff out there so someone else will handle it?
    • 6429 posts
    57
    December 22, 2015 4:31:49 PM PST
    I have been trying to get the people of yuba county to understand the TRLIA bunch in 2006 ( or 2005) accepted the responsibility of the Levee failures from the state, placing the responsibility on the Yuba Foothills, and the Yuba Valleys , citizens now and citizens later.

    Who accepted these duties? Was it the TRLIA board or the YUba County Board? who ever it was, we the people did not permit it in fact we the people did not permit TRLIA to be brought into being.

    There is a lot that has to be done, I am doing what I can Quietly because the ones who created this boondoggle have a lot more funds than I, and there are more corrupt officials involved than honest people interested.
    • 4977 posts
    58
    December 22, 2015 4:39:20 PM PST
    You are going to have to get an expert agency/entity to make a claim of unsafe conditions. That is the reality, right or wrong. Citizen complaining won't do a thing.
    Your current supervisor and your friend Mary Jane Griego aren't going to carry that torch.
    Until that proof is provided, or another levee failure takes place, nothing will change. Even if the levee fails again, I'll bet all that has to be done is claim the storm was worse than the 100 year or 200 year level and the levee "couldn't be expected to hold" anyway.
    Furthermore, ever year that distances us from the '86 flood hinders any effort to go backwards.

    • 6429 posts
    59
    December 22, 2015 5:50:21 PM PST
    Thank you for your interest.
    • 4977 posts
    60
    December 22, 2015 7:06:30 PM PST
    Another year stuck at square one.

    This isn't about the levee; this is personal for you.
    • 6429 posts
    61
    December 22, 2015 7:29:35 PM PST
    "That is the reality, right or wrong. Citizen complaining won't do a thing."

    You must have missed the fact the levee responsibility was dumped on the Foothill people, their property as well as the valley people! The state was joyful to get rid of the responsibility , the people who accepted the responsibility can leave and not be responsible like those who moved from Plumas Lake.
    • 4977 posts
    62
    December 22, 2015 8:02:50 PM PST
    I haven't missed a thing, cleanup. I stated the county taxpayer now has responsibility of the levees. All of the county, not just the foothill people - though the 5th district has been paying a larger portion of tax revenues over the years - are on the hook for the levees.

    Irregardless, it will take an authoritative entity to produce documentation the levee is deficient. No amount of posting, complaining, or arguing will change that fact.
    You don't have the clout or credibility to force action, neither do I.
    I'm not willing to put forth the effort to fund raise and get an authority to verify the levee as insufficient.
    You're afraid of other with money and power so you aren't going to do it either.
    No proof equals no action. End of game.

    Thank you for your interest.
    • 6429 posts
    63
    December 22, 2015 9:50:15 PM PST
    You are welcome.
    • 6429 posts
    64
    December 24, 2015 6:39:02 PM PST
    MERRY MERRY CHRISTMAS ! TO ALL A HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!!!!
    • 6429 posts
    65
    December 29, 2015 11:05:29 PM PST

    Below are FEMA accreditation requirements given to Certifications of levees by the The U.S.Army corps of engineers or, any person with a engineers license.

    10.3.2.3.
    Embankment Protection
    Engineering analyses are required to be pe
    rformed to demonstrate
    no appreciable erosion
    of the levee embankment during th
    e base flood due to currents or wa
    ves, and that any anticipated
    erosion may not result in failure
    of the levee embankment or
    foundation either directly or
    indirectly through seepage or subseq
    uent instability. Specific factors to be analyzed to determine
    the adequacy of embankment protection are: expect
    ed flow velocities (especially in constricted
    areas), expected wind and wave action, ice lo
    ading, impact of debr
    is, slope protection
    techniques, duration of flooding
    at various stage and velociti
    es, embankment and foundation
    materials, levee alignment, bends, and transitions
    , and levee side slopes. The FEMA guidelines
    do not, however, provide guidance on acceptable perf
    ormance criteria/standards of the identified
    embankment protection f
    actors to be evaluated.
    10.3.2.4.
    Embankment and Foundation Stability
    Stability analyses for levee embankments ar
    e required to be submitted that demonstrate
    the adequacy of both short-term and long-term
    slope stability of flood protection levees.
    New Orleans Systems
    Independent Levee Hurricane Katrina
    Investigation Team May 22, 2006
    10 - 10
    Stability analyses are required to include th
    e expected seepage during the storm loading
    conditions and demonstrate that seepage into
    or through the embankment will not result in
    unacceptable stability performance. FEMA provi
    des for the use of the USACE Case IV (as
    defined by EM 1110-2-1913, “Design and Construc
    tion of Levees”) as an additionally
    acceptable engineering analysis method. The requi
    red factors for evaluation include: depth of
    flooding, duration of flooding, embankment geometry
    and length of seepage path at critical
    locations, embankment and foundation materials,
    embankment compaction, penetrations, other
    design factors affecting seepage (such as draina
    ge layers), and other
    design factors affecting
    embankment and foundation stabilit
    y (such as interior berms).
    These requirements do not,
    however, specify the nature of em
    bankment stability to be evalua
    ted, such as sliding (horizontal
    displacement) resistance. The FEMA guide
    lines do not, however, provide guidance on
    acceptable performance criteria/standards of
    the identified stability to be evaluated.
    10.3.2.5.
    Settlement
    Once levees have been constructed to the spec
    ified crest elevation, th
    eir ability to provide
    the desired degree of flood protection against
    the base flood is gene
    rally controlled by
    settlements of the foundation materials beneath the
    levee. In order to de
    monstrate the adequacy
    of the crest elevation over the intended service
    life, FEMA requires that
    engineering analyses be
    submitted that assess the potential and magnitude of future losses of freeboard as a result of levee
    settlement and demonstrate that freeboard will
    be maintained within the minimum freeboard
    requirements for the duration of th
    e levee service period. Detailed
    analysis procedures, such as
    those specified in the USACE EM 1110-2-
    1904, “Soil Mechanics Design – Settlement
    Analyses,” are expected. The required factor
    s for evaluation include: embankment loads,
    compressibility of embankment soils, compre
    ssibility of foundation so
    ils, age of the levee
    system, and construction compaction methods.
    The FEMA guidelines do not provide guidance
    on acceptable performance criteria/st
    andards of the identified stability factors to be evaluated.
    • 6429 posts
    66
    December 29, 2015 11:12:32 PM PST
    The South bank of the YUba River was Corps of Engineer certified in 2007 , but the certification was removed in 2009 upon discovering the certification did not meet levee safety requirements of 44 CFR 65.10, However, the engineering firm hired by TRLIA regardless of the levee not meeting requirements as shown by the Corps removal, certified the levee any way in 2010!!
    • 6429 posts
    67
    January 1, 2016 1:10:45 PM PST
    www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/fhm/rm_m
    ain.shtm · 1–877–FEMA MAP
    Q:
    What is FEMA doing to address levee system issues?
    A:
    FEMA does not build, maintain, or certify levee systems.
    FEMA is responsible for identifying flood hazards and
    assessing flood risks in levee-impacted areas through
    engineering studies and mapping projects, including
    updating the existing NFIP flood maps. In addition,
    FEMA has established criteria for recognizing levee
    systems as providing a 1-percent-annual-chance or
    greater level of flood risk reduction. However, FEMA
    does not actually
    examine or analyze structures
    to determine
    their condition or how they will perform during a given
    flood event. FEMA relies on communities and other
    levee owners to provide data and documentation
    showing that a levee system meets NFIP design,
    operations, and maintenance criteria. If the levee
    system does not meet these regulatory criteria, FEMA
    will show the levee system not providing 1-percent-
    annual-chance flood risk reduction on the FIRM. In
    addition to identifying risks in levee-impacted areas,
    FEMA works in conjunction with its Federal, State, local,
    and professional/technical partners to bolster flood risk
    mitigation in communities nationwide. Finally, because
    the risks associated with levee systems are real FEMA
    strongly encourages flood insurance, risk reduction,
    adherence to evacuation procedures, floodproofing, and
    other protective measures in
    all
    levee-impacted areas,
    even for those that are accredited. FEMA emphasizes the
    need for property owners to consider such measures
    through notes on affected FIRM panels.
    • 6429 posts
    68
    January 1, 2016 1:20:34 PM PST
    As shown, FEMA goes no where near the Yuba River South bank levee section 0.79 so they cannot certify or accredited the levee. They can accept TRLIA words saying the levee is safe but TRLIA has not done ANY levee construction where the levee failed in 1986, nor has anyone.

    FEMA emphasizes the need for PROPERTY owners to consider such measures through notes on affected FIRM Panels. I recommend that those paid to keep our levees safe do so instead of avoiding the most dangerous section of levee that protects habitation all the way to the Bear River!
    • 4977 posts
    69
    January 1, 2016 9:46:42 PM PST
    Cleanup - what you are posting here is not drawing attention nor will it effect any change in the current state of things.
    It will take an expert entity or recognized individual in an official knowledgeable capacity to publicly claim, with verifiable evidence, the levee certification is fraudulent and needs further repairs. Obviously, you are not capable to get this done.
    It may make you feel better to get things off your chest on this forum; nothing you have presented is going to bring about action.
    We're about to hit 29 years since the breech at the only one complaining is you.

    It's kind of like crying about missing buildings in lower Marysville. Those buildings are gone. Unless you are going to get involved to help make improvements, complaining about something that is in the past does nothing except turn people off.

    The levee has been repaired, had additional work and certified. Unless you can cause change to have those facts reviewed (and changed) all the complaining is nothing more than sour grapes.

    You've told us: those that need to know do know, experts know, those that can make things happen are aware, things are going to happen, officials falsified information.....yet you can't back up these claims. The only facts that are indisputable are a lost election, failed recall, failed attempt at Law Enforcement leadership, legal hassles, and contempt for most leadership positions in many if not all governmental agencies.

    It still all appears to be sour grapes.
    • 6429 posts
    70
    January 1, 2016 10:28:21 PM PST

    "The levee has been repaired,"

    You know this how? Because TRLIA told you so? I spent nine years protecting the people south of the Yuba River from floods and you say still a "expert " has to say the levee is no good, PLEASE! Use your head.

    You can accept TRLIA words saying the levee is safe but TRLIA has not done ANY levee construction where the levee failed in 1986,on the waterside, nor has anyone.
    • 4977 posts
    71
    January 1, 2016 10:46:19 PM PST
    You are not a certificated expert. You have been unable to accomplish any action.
    Use YOUR head....you do not have the credibility needed to bring about action.

    You keep making unsubstantiated claims and the years go by....almost 30 of them. Who supports you your claims? No one will publicly and that speaks volumes.
    • 873 posts
    72
    January 2, 2016 10:04:12 AM PST
    cleanup said:
    Any one of the levee defects TRLIA failed to construct can cause a levee failure, any one.
    From the 14 years I lived in Olivehurst I can say the general consensus of the locals is, that the Linda/Olivehurst area is the sacraficcial lamb for the Yuba/Sutter area. Folks out there have always said that anytime the levees get close to being threatened around Marysville or Yuba City, "they" always make sure the levee breaks on their side, because the others have too much to lose. By breaking the levee out there it takes the pressure off the other areas, which is why it always breaks over there.
    I fact, I had a friend that swore he was sitting in his car close to the '86' break and heard a noise and electrical static in his radio. He said he looked at the levee and watched it break and that the the levee had been blown on purpose. 
    So maybe that explains why the defiiencies have been certified into the levees in that area (for future failure)?
    Your satisfaction may be in supplying the attorney's with documentation and knowledge if/when there is another break!! In fact, you might be considered an expert witness.
    • 4977 posts
    73
    January 2, 2016 6:47:29 PM PST
    cleanup said:
    "The levee has been repaired," You know this how? Because TRLIA told you so? I spent nine years protecting the people south of the Yuba River from floods and you say still a "expert " has to say the levee is no good, PLEASE! Use your head. You can accept TRLIA words saying the levee is safe but TRLIA has not done ANY levee construction where the levee failed in 1986,on the waterside, nor has anyone.

    Still unable to get anything done. Attacks me for saying a true expert's validation of the leeve's condition is needed.

    Cleanup, you just can't grasp that no one is listening to you. If you're so sure you're right, get an expert to team up with you. A true expert has credibility; your legal hassles and failed political ambitions ruined yours.

    Is this about the levee and protection or about you getting revenge with Yuba County? 

    You claim you have support. Get 20 friends to pony up $100-$200 and get an expert to back you up. Stop whining and do something.

    • 6429 posts
    74
    January 2, 2016 10:40:21 PM PST
    kibbefolks, In the first post of this thread I posted the event of the 1997 levee failure was told to the State of California Engineers and the Engineers came and looked at the Ditch containing the boil site. The Engineers said they would stop Nordic Construction from digging the Mitigation pond the next day.

    The Engineers failed to stop the digging of the pond the Winter of 1996-97 and the levee failed where we told them it would.

    Since the Engineers failed to give credence to our Expert opinion, some folks who sued the State felt the levee event was planned.

    There are many officials who know what I say is true, but there is some who have a reason to nay-say the fact that when the flood water in 1986 going through the levee sand, tore a deep , Wide and long trench which removed any semblance of a Foundation which was needed for the Professional engineer in 2010, to certify the deficient levee as a 100 year certified levee, which the PROFESSIONAL Engineer told FEMA he did indeed use the FOUNDATION to show the levee at 0.79 was STABLE.

    The FEMA PROFESSIONAL Engineer accepted the words and box of evidence showing the levee is solid and accredited it.

    There is ample proof of negligence placed with officials to bring law suits against many engineers but the now is not the time apparently.
    • 4977 posts
    75
    January 3, 2016 9:38:05 AM PST
    OK, cleanup...let's try this again.
    You claim there is ample proof of negligence.
    Didn't the citizens win the 86 flood suit?

    You claim the levee is still deficient. It will take legal action to make something happen.
    What specifically is keeping legal action from happening? Is it financing? If so, how much is needed to get the process started? Is it verification of your claims? That's easy, subpoena those with knowledge and make them testify under oath.
    What is needed to move from complaining to action? No one, not even those you hate, want another flood.(But it will !cost likely happen as you can't control mother nature.)
    • 6429 posts
    76
    January 3, 2016 2:54:43 PM PST
    Thank you for the information 2 grands, yes, the people did win the 1986 paterno law suit, many millions in fact, but that did not fix the Giant trench running under the boulders that replaced the river run and sand levee.

    I saw the gaping hole caused by the flood water flushing out what ever was known as a foundation towards the north Beale road where it remained until the State filled it in with sand in 1988. In 1993 RD784 was approached by the Yuba County Board of Supervisors to develop a water supply for housing development in Plumas lake but I as President refused because RD 784 knew the levees were not stable. The state approached RD784 to accept the Deep long Wide trench as a part of the levee but we turned it down because it was not on our responsibility area of 10 feet out from the levee toe.

    The Trench is still there and in fact during the last High water of 1995-96-97 flood water flowed through the Boulders in the trench, showing there were great gaps between the boulders and there was a slump in the top and waterside of the levee where it broke in 1986, and, the slump is still there today!

    If we get another weather system such as we got back then, that may be as Engineering firm Kleinfelder a place to fail because the new setback levee on the Feather River will be solid and will probably break the YUba River at 0.79 again.

    TRLIA has spent over 400,000,000 during 2004 -2010 but has not spent any of it on the 0.79 area where they started out in 2004 to fix. I am not complaining, I am reporting.
    • 4977 posts
    77
    January 3, 2016 4:29:38 PM PST
    Cleanup, you have told this story over and over and over and it has been discussed here for years.
    Yes, there was a gaping hole in the levee when it failed. There's a gaping hole in every levee that fails! Yes, boulders were put in the breech to give something to work with/against to stop the flow of water into Olivehurst and Linda. Water may have seeped through the breech site in other high water events. Water seeps through hundreds of locations during high water. The Feather all along Garden Hwy has seepage issues during high water. Drive the old Garden Hwy to Verona sometime during high water. You'll be surprised how much water seeps to the land side of the levee. Hundreds or thousands of sandbags were used in the last high water event to control the seepage down toward Dingville. Recognized experts have proclaimed the Yuba River breech site at .79 to be repaired or mitigated or whatever terms you want to use - and they have stated the repairs performed as expected in the last high water event.

    You can tell by the response no one cares. Call those people naysayers or what ever floats your boat but they aren't listening to you or me or anyone else.
    No one will care unless the levee breeches in the same exact spot in the future.
    TRLIA did spend millions and it went to good use. Like it or not, we do have some of the best levees in the nation.
    If you want to make something happen at the 86 breech site, mile marker .79, what are you going to do besides "report"?
    You're "reporting" can be undone by pointing out certified experts have proclaimed the levee to have a certain level of safety; and your motivation stems from a well-publicized history. So what are you going to do?
    • 4977 posts
    78
    January 3, 2016 4:31:04 PM PST
    You've also stated there is a "slump" but then have stated there been additional berms built up around the breech area and the slump was dressed and no longer visible.
    • 6429 posts
    79
    January 3, 2016 5:07:06 PM PST
    There is a slump on the Waterside, filled in with gravel which is well known as a bad water blockage repair. As I have said before, TRLIA has NOT done any work on the WATER side where the danger is, just on the land side with the berms. The Slump is certainly VISIBLE on the waterside where it has been all along,
    • 4977 posts
    80
    January 3, 2016 5:10:13 PM PST
    Are you going to do anything other than complain?
    • 6429 posts
    81
    January 3, 2016 6:28:11 PM PST
    Correct you on your statements.
    There is a slump on the Waterside, filled in with gravel which is well known as a bad water blockage repair. As I have said before, TRLIA has NOT done any work on the WATER side where the danger is, just on the land side with the berms. The Slump is certainly VISIBLE on the waterside where it has been all along,
    • 4977 posts
    82
    January 3, 2016 6:40:00 PM PST
    Thanks for the corrections.
    There's an awful lot of reinforcement on the land side in the breech area.

    I guess by your lack of answers your only concern is telling your story and hoping someone else will rise up and take the charge?
    • 6429 posts
    83
    January 3, 2016 7:07:54 PM PST
    Yes, though that is not probable among the people here. it will have to be the Federal Government which is loaded with corrupt cases at this time, sooner or later though.
    • 4977 posts
    84
    January 3, 2016 7:33:20 PM PST
    You and I both know, right or wrong, the government won't get involved in a local levee issue. The county has accepted responsibility and has their certification.
    It will take something to upset the status quo. Since you are the only one speaking about the possibility of an unsafe repair I doubt anything will ever happen.
    There is no pending case as the flood suit was settled. I don't see anything or anyone on the horizon that is going to cause change.
    • 6429 posts
    85
    January 3, 2016 7:44:40 PM PST
    You are probably right, it is just a Federal United States Corps of Engineers project Levee.
    • 6429 posts
    86
    January 3, 2016 7:46:07 PM PST
    Where did you live in Yuba County when you got flooded?
    • 4977 posts
    87
    January 3, 2016 9:08:25 PM PST
    Linda
    • 6429 posts
    88
    January 3, 2016 10:14:20 PM PST
    OH, the 1986 flood , Me too, I only had about a foot and one half of water at my home , but my Sister in law at the end of Cohn Avenue, got water almost to her roof. Bad times.
    • 873 posts
    89
    January 4, 2016 2:29:07 AM PST
    Cohn Ave. is in the area where the sand (soil) was borrowed to build the levees way back when in the first place. If you are heading north on Arboga, at about Grand Ave. you can see a dip in the road where the drop starts and it gets deeper as you get closer to the levee. By the time you get to Cohn the drop is about 7 or 8 feet or so. That whole area of west Linda is the worst to flood, I feel for all those folks that live there. The only place worse than there is the Plumas Lake area which is 20 to 30 feet lower in elevation.
    • 4977 posts
    90
    January 4, 2016 11:04:01 AM PST
    I got about 18 inches in my home. My grandparents got about 5 feet. I carried my grandmother into her home so she could be involved with recovering what they could. They're long gone now - like so many others.
    • 873 posts
    91
    January 4, 2016 1:33:20 PM PST
    I got about 14" in my home on Western in Olivehurst. The only reason it got flooded is because there was so much water it couldn't all go through the underpass at Feather River Blvd or Erle, so it followed the railroad tracks south through Olivehurst. The houses within 300 feet or so of the tracks got flooded. I was blessed though, compared to west Linda.

    A lot of the poor people that got flooded didn't live long enough to see the flood settlement and get their money. I was 30 when the flood happened, so I got to get my money from it.
    • 6429 posts
    92
    January 4, 2016 3:19:27 PM PST
    The North end of Cohn Avenue was not hit so bad, but from Garden Avenue and cedar to Arboga and south to Erle road and on south got deep water. The biggest problem for people from the Feather River Blvd on south to Plumas Lake was even after the Water was cut off the water kept flowing in a giant blob of water for days until it reached the Bear River levee and stayed there for weeks, sitting 17 feet deep.

    During the 1997 flood, the water flowed from the break at country club road south to the bear River where it backed up again at 17 feet.

    The Local Sheriff decided to cut a notch in the levee to let the water flow out into the Feather River, but another storm brought heavy rain again and instead of the water flowing out of the basin, the feather River flowed into the basin!
    • 4977 posts
    93
    January 4, 2016 4:03:00 PM PST
    The same thing happened in 55. The levee was blown near Nicolaus and a storm pushed water back into the flood zone.

    I find the way the water works during a flood to be very interesting. Yes, a flood is a terrible thing, no doubt about it. I still find the way disaster work and how we handle and face them to be quite interesting.

    My grandparents didn't live long enough to see any money either. They were offered an 8% loan to repair their home. I was working and much younger and was offered a 4% loan. Renters got something like $10K scott-free and many left town with their money. There were other organizations that worked hard to help people get back on their feet. Too bad we lost our mall. I will always scratch my head about putting homes in Plumas Lake and wonder if it was a master plan to sway the feds for levee monies. Either way, the next time it floods the damage in Plumas Lake will be horrendous.
    • 6429 posts
    94
    January 4, 2016 7:13:34 PM PST
    You are correct, the housing cost will be the worst because they cannot be moved out of harms way. The people on the other hand will have days to get out, depending on the levee break site. If the Yuba Breaks, the time will be days, if the Feather breaks, depending on where determines the time to get out. If the Bear breaks, same thing.

    • 2563 posts
    95
    January 4, 2016 11:13:49 PM PST
    Do any of you remember the story about how the Chinese invented roast pig?
    • 873 posts
    96
    January 5, 2016 3:58:45 AM PST
    DickBoyd said:
    Do any of you remember the story about how the Chinese invented roast pig?
    Would it be by burning down their house?
    • 2563 posts
    97
    January 5, 2016 8:44:55 AM PST
    kibbefolks said:
    DickBoyd said:
    Do any of you remember the story about how the Chinese invented roast pig?
    Would it be by burning down their house?

    Yes, Hi-Ti's son Bo-Bo.

    • 6429 posts
    98
    January 11, 2016 10:01:24 PM PST
    In 1986, during the flood people were able to escape to Beale Air Force Base , Sutter, Marysville, and out of town and after the flood water passed through Linda, Olivehurst, Arboga and made its way slowly south to Plumas lake, the people were able to return to their mud filled homes. We had water delivered to us daily by Beale Water tankers ( Water buffaloes) some had Electricity and stores were open in Marysville , Yuba City. We survived.
    • 4977 posts
    99
    January 12, 2016 11:50:04 AM PST
    You will find the silt from the flood in everything....and forever.
    • 6429 posts
    100
    January 12, 2016 1:40:50 PM PST
    It was called" Flood Mud" .