Skip to main content
Log in

The dilemma of flood control in the United States

  • Research
  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In spite of increasing annual expenditures for flood control, losses from flooding continue to rise in the United States. This seeming contradiction arises from overdependence on federally supported structural solutions to flood problems. Nonstructural controls are initiated reluctantly at local levels of government because of constitutional questions, restrictions of local tax bases, lack of federal subsidies for nonstructural solutions, and the high costs of delineating flood hazard areas. The success of the National Flood Insurance Program is doubtful since only about five percent of the flood-prone communities in the United States have qualified for the regular program. Future reduction of flood losses is dependent upon increasing popular awareness of flood hazards and altering federal subsidy policies to reduce the impact of local land-use regulations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature cited

  • Barnett, D. V. 1975. Luncheon address. Pages 15–31in Proceedings of seminar on flood plain management. Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, Denver, Colorado. (ed. W. De Groot)

  • Bauman, D. D., and R. W. Kates. 1972. Risk from nature in the city. Pages 169–194in T. R. Detwyler and M. G. Marcus, eds. Urbanization and environment. Duxbury Press, Belmont, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, M. A. 1968. Uniform flood-frequency estimating methods for federal agencies. Water Resources Res. 4:891–908.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blewitt, R. I. 1975. The flood hazard cost of settling floodplains. Flood Hazard News 5:4–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dingman, S. L., and R. H. Platt. 1977. Flood plain zoning: implications of hydrologic and legal uncertainty. Water Resources Res. 13:519–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunham, A. 1959. Flood control via the police power. Univ. of Pennsylvania Law Rev. 107:1098–1132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Funk, J. W. 1969. The flood potential and future flood problems. Pages 37–49in M. D. Dougal, ed. Flood plain management, Iowa's experience. Iowa State Univ. Press. Omes, Iowa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geisler, C. C., and O. B. Martinson. 1976. Local control of land use: profile of a problem. Land Economics 52:371–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodard, J. E. 1976. The nation's increasing vulnerability to flood catastrophe. T. Soil and Water Conservation 31:48–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanke, S. H. 1972. Flood losses—will they ever stop? J. Soil and Water Conservation 27:242–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogan, T. M. 1963. State flood-plan zoning. DePaul Law Review 12:246–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoyt, W. G., and W. B. Langbein. 1955. Floods. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. 469 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leopold, L. B., and T. Maddock. 1954. The flood control controversy. Roland Press, N.Y. 278 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liebman, E. 1973. Legal problems in regulating flood hazard zones. Amer. Soc. Civil Engr., Hydraulics Div. 99:2113–2123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, F. C., 1958, Regulating floodplain development. Dept. of Geography, Univ. of Chicago, Res. Paper 56, 216 pp.

  • Peterson, E. T. 1954. Big dam foolishness. Devin-Adair Co., N.Y. 224 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Platt, R. H. 1976. The national flood insurance program: some midstream perspectives. Amer. Inst. Planners J. 42:303–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, W. J., and J. E. Goodard. 1974. Extent and development of urban flood plains. U.S. Geol. Survey Circular 601-J, 14 pp.

  • Task Force on Federal Flood Control Policy. 1966. A unified national program for managing flood losses. House Doc. 465, 89th Cong., 2nd Ses. U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1972. Interim report on Sand and Toll Gate creeks, Colorado. v. I and II, U.S. Army Engineer District, Omaha, Nebraska. 95 pp. and 12 Appen.

  • U.S. Water Resources Council. 1971. Regulation of flood-hazard areas to reduce flood losses. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington, D.C. 578 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Water Resources Council. 1976. A unified national program for flood plain management. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, G. F. 1959. Action program for the states: a new attack on flood losses. State Govt. 32:121–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, G. F., ed. 1961. Papers on flood problems. Dept. of Geography, Univ. of Chicago, Res. Paper 70, 228 pp.

  • Wiitala, S. W., K. R. Jetter, A. J. Summerville. 1961. Hydraulic and hydrologic aspects of flood plain planning. U.S. Geol. Survey Water Supply Paper 1526, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 68 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolman, M. G. 1971. Evaulating alternative techniques of floodplain mapping. Water Resources Res. 7:1383–1392.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Costa, J.E. The dilemma of flood control in the United States. Environmental Management 2, 313–322 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01866671

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01866671

Key words

Navigation