Laserfiche WebLink
1 T T nter 1 5 <br /> <br />r ii i <br />The Summer of 1993 was one of the wettest <br />of record. While only a few watersheds <br />experienced a record peak runoff during 1993, <br />many of the watersheds had record discharges <br />in terms of the total volume of water discharged. <br />Throughout the fail of 1993 and the winter of <br />1994, stream flow conditions remained <br />abnormally high. However, spring flooding dId <br />not materialize in the spring of 1994 due to mini- <br />drought conditions occurring in Marchand April. <br />While 1994 was not as wet as 1993, stream <br />flow conditions remained high for much of the <br />state. A wet period in September and October <br />brought stream flows up to levels near, and in <br />some Cases greater than those of the same <br />period. Fortunately, November and December <br />has been both warmer and dryer thou normal <br />thereby allowing some of the excess water to <br />drain off. Even so, stream flow conditions remain <br />between the high side of normal to the high <br />range for most of the state. Two examples are <br />the Minnesota River at Jordan and the Mississippi <br />River at Anoka. As of early January, both remain <br />in the high flow range, above the monthly Q25 <br />but below the monthly Q10. This 15 the first time <br />in several months that the Minnesota River at <br />Jordan has fallen below the monthly Q10. _ <br />- Surtace Water Unit <br />Department of <br />Natural Resources <br />Division of Waters <br />Printed on Recycled Paper <br />Contains 1596 postcon~ner waste <br />The Flood of 1.993 was a rude awakening for <br />many, bringing the potential power of <br />floodwaters to the public consciousness, at least <br />for a time. This flood was the straw that broke <br />the camel's bock. As a result, FEMA has <br />reorganized and made Hazard Mitigation Its <br />cornerstone. Bec®use of the overall shift in <br />notional priorffies and direction the Division of <br />Waters (DOW) is in the process of creatinfl a <br />Flood Hazard Mitigation Hydrologist 2 ition. <br />The position will develop the flood hazard <br />mitigation component of the Division of <br />Emergency Management's (DEM) <br />comprehensive State Hazard Mitigation Plan. <br />The plan will include ail hazards such as <br />earthquakes, fires, chemical spills, etc. The <br />position will also word'inate DOW's review of the <br />1993 post-flood hazard mitigation grant program <br />applicat(ons submitted to DEM. The position will <br />be unclassified and will be funded on a yearly <br />basis.. At present, it fs expected to be funded by <br />FEMA. far up to two years. One of the exper- <br />iences to be gained by serving in this position will <br />be an appreciation of large-scale planning, <br />especially statewide hazard mitigation for <br />flooding. The State's Hazard Mitigation Plan will <br />be developed by a team of inter-discipinary, <br />inter-agency professionals. _ <br />fqud cppQrtuNly to participate h and bersetit born <br />pro8-ams of the Minnesota Deparhnent of fJahad <br />Resotrces is avapd.~le to al'Jndvlatxits regardess ofrace; <br />COlar, nattond origirs, sex, sexed orlentatlon, ma~ltd <br />staha, status wilts regard to public a~istance, vpe or <br />asabWty. pscrii~Nnatbn hquHes should ibe serst to: MN/ <br />tMIR, 5Q0 Lafayette Road. ~!. Paul. NpV 55155.4031; ar the <br />Egad Opporttnlty Office, Department of the kiterlor. . <br />Washiis~fon, D.C. 20240. ,. . <br />D 1995 State of Minnesota, Department of Wat~xai <br />