The Wetland Book pp 1279-1284 | Cite as

Mississippi Watershed and the Role of Wetlands in Flood Management

Reference work entry

Abstract

The Mississippi River is the longest river in North America and the fourth longest in the world. The Mississippi-Ohio-Missouri (MOM) watershed , including the Arkansas River, covers some 4.76 million square kilometers encompassing approximately 40% of the conterminous United States of America. The watershed comprises several major sub-catchments and ultimately discharges into the Gulf of Mexico through the Mississippi Deltaic Plan (MDP). Within the last 100 years, the MDP has experienced relative sea level rise as the surface area has been reduced and wetlands lost. Much of the wetland loss has been associated with wider activities across the watershed that have reduced sediment input to the river and consequently to the wetlands. This, combined with the likely increased intensity of tropical storms as a result of climate change and the ongoing loss of wetlands which offer protection from coastal storm surges, will increase the vulnerability to flooding of near coastal human settlements and infrastructure.

Keywords

Flood control Sea level rise Regulating ecosystem service 

References

  1. Black H. Unnatural disaster—human factors in the Mississippi floods. Environ Health Perspect. 2008;116(9):A390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Britsch LD, Dunbar JB. Land loss rates: Louisiana coastal plain. J Coast Res. 1993:324–38.Google Scholar
  3. Changnon SA. The historical struggle with floods on the Mississippi River basin: impacts of recent floods and lessons for future flood management and policy. Water Int. 1998;23(4):263–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Costanza R, Mitsch WJ, Day Jr JW. A new vision for New Orleans and the Mississippi delta: applying ecological economics and ecological engineering. Front Ecol Environ. 2006;4(9):465–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Day JW, Boesch DF, Clairain EJ, Kemp GP, Laska SB, Mitsch WJ, et al. Restoration of the Mississippi Delta: lessons from hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Science. 2007;315(5819):1679–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dierauer J, Pinter N, Remo JW. Evaluation of levee setbacks for flood-loss reduction, Middle Mississippi River, USA. J Hydrol. 2012;450:1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fink DF, Mitsch WJ. Seasonal and storm event nutrient removal by a created wetland in an agricultural watershed. Ecol Eng. 2004;23(4):313–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Galat DL, Fredrickson LH, Humburg DD, Bataille KJ, Bodie JR, Dohrenwend J, et al. Flooding to restore connectivity of regulated, large-river wetlands natural and controlled flooding as complementary processes along the lower Missouri River. Bioscience. 1998;48(9):721–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hey DL, Philippi NS. Flood reduction through wetland restoration: the Upper Mississippi River Basin as a case history. Restor Ecol. 1995;3(1):4–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mitsch WJ, Day JW. Restoration of wetlands in the Mississippi–Ohio–Missouri (MOM) River Basin: experience and needed research. Ecol Eng. 2006;26(1):55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Olsen JR, Stedinger JR, Matalas NC, Stakhiv EZ. Climate variability and flood frequency estimation for the upper Mississippi and lower Missouri rivers. J Am Water Resour Assoc. 1999;35(6):1509–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.RM Wetlands and Environment LtdLittleworth, OxfordshireUK

Personalised recommendations