It must also look for opportunities to maintain and improve the environment for people and wildlife while carrying out all of its duties. Monitoring and reporting on flood and coastal erosion risk management. Floods — on the Environment Agency website. LLFAs are county councils and unitary authorities. They lead in managing local flood risks i. This includes ensuring co-operation between the Risk Management Authorities in their area. LLFAs and the Environment Agency and all other Risk Management Authorities need to work closely together and ensure that the plans they are making both locally and nationally link up.
An essential part of managing local flood risk is taking account of new development in land use plans and strategies. By working in partnership with communities, LLFAs can raise awareness of flood and coastal erosion risks. Local flood action groups and other organisations that represent those living and working in areas at risk of flooding will be useful and trusted channels for sharing information, guidance and support direct with the community.
The National Flood Forum may be able to provide information on flood action groups in your area. LLFAs should encourage local communities to participate in local flood risk management. Depending on local circumstances, this could include developing and sharing good practice in risk management, training community volunteers so that they can raise awareness of flood risk in their community, and helping the community to prepare flood action plans.
LLFAs must also consult local communities about their local flood risk management strategy. District and Borough Councils are Risk Management Authorities and key partners in planning local flood risk management. District and unitary authorities in coastal areas are Coastal Protection Authorities. They lead on coastal erosion risk management activities in their area. They are responsible for developing Shoreline Management Plans SMPs which provide a long term holistic framework for managing the risk of coastal change on their section of the coast.
The consolidation of construction responsibility for levees that receive federal funding promotes consistent construction outcomes that align with USACE and FEMA standards. Currently, the location and condition of levees in the United States is unclear—where they are, what they are protecting assets and lives , and their condition Chapter 6.
This represents a significant gap in addressing the challenge of flood risk management behind levees: How can the problem be addressed if the extent and location of the problem is unclear? Although the long-term plan of both USACE and FEMA is to develop a single database for covering the levees that operate under the oversight of the two agencies, this consolidation effort, which was initially recommended in the National Levee Policy Study, is proceeding slowly because of resource constraints FEMA, Eventually USACE may be able to bring into the database information about state, local, and individually operated levees that do not fall into either of the federal agency programs.
However, at present, there is a significant need for completion of the consolidation of the federal levee inventories so that levees in the two federal programs can be identified and overlaps eliminated. The maintenance today of two databases is inefficient and creates a potential for disinformation at times when information about levees is badly needed.
These non-NFIP levees, along with several thousand other levees may eventually be entered into the database. The addition of these nonfederal program levees will require the close cooperation of the states and local entities. Flood risk communication was a key topic during discussions. The principal challenge identified regarding risk communication was the multiplicity of uncoordinated messages developed and communicated by federal agencies. The collective opinion of those in the Wye Island meeting was the need for increased coordination of this messaging.
Discussion with relevant stakeholders during information-gathering efforts of this committee corroborate this opinion and indicate that the problem continues to exist.
Given the multiple entities that have either regulatory authority or considerable interest in levees, it is no surprise that inconsistent messaging from multiple sources exists and leads to confusion and misunderstanding. Inconsistent messaging is directly related to the lack of collaboration and coordination among entities in communicating risk to local stakeholders. Inconsistent messaging can involve definitions, for example, what defines a levee, what the appropriate definition of risk is, and concepts such as the reality of residual risk behind a levee.
Simplicity of messaging is also important in communicating risk Paveglio et al. Some of the overlap among these maps is a result of research and development activities being conducted by the agencies. In other cases, the overlap results from the necessity of supporting an agency mission.
Furthermore, other messaging products prepared by federal agencies addressing the challenge of floodplain management or flood risk reduction are not always coordinated with a consistent message Chapter 7. There is no one agency that has the responsibility to provide oversight and coordination of federal flood risk mapping products and other communication products.
Similarly, there is little to no coordination of the collection of underlying data, such as with Lidar, by these agencies. The utility of levee-related flood risk communication developed and presented at the federal level is challenged by uncoordinated messaging.
One federal message using consistent terminology, transparent data, and open discussion and decisions about the determination of flood risk is critical to inform the affected communities who, in turn, communicate and manage risk at the local level. FEMA should assume a leadership role in providing direction for research, development, and release of flood risk communication products and maps.
This role might include FEMA constituting a central leadership group or some type of coordinating body. FEMA should communicate flood risk through a collaborative approach that works with and provides strong support to local communities.
This additional emphasis entails local involvement from individuals, communities, and states in all phases of the risk communication process. This requires that FEMA interact with preestablished collaborative decision-making networks at the local level.
Success lies in providing risk information to the local level where local governments and citizens have the responsibility to drive behavioral changes to reduce risk. USACE and FEMA share responsibility for oversight of the conditions of levees that are part of both programs and ensuring that the integrity of the structures means necessary standards to ensure the safety of those behind levees.
It has been difficult for FEMA and USACE to develop a comprehensive approach to reducing flood damages across the nation, and in the case of levees, to ensure that levees are given proper oversight by those responsible for them, the levee owners, and operators.
In most cases, states play a minimal role in dealing with the flood challenges facing communities in their states. Less than five states have inventories of the levees within their boundaries.
Even though the National Flood Insurance Act strongly encouraged state participation in the program in support of its goals, most states defer action to FEMA and their communities. Regional bodies conducting risk communication to achieve common commitment to sustainable mitigation, can play an important role.
For example, the cooperative decision-making frameworks built by metropolitan planning organizations 4 have been in place for several decades, and many have built networks of trust and credibility in communities. It identified, as did the Sharing the Challenge report on the Mississippi River floods IFMRC, , the need for action by the federal government to bring together all parties involved in development and implementation of national floodplain management programs to better define the responsibilities of each group and to develop a roadmap dealing with these challenges in the future.
It is also responsible for investigating flooding, authorising consent to works and carrying out enforcement action in relation to ordinary watercourses.
Ordinary watercourses are those that are not part of the main river network or Internal Drainage Board network, including drains, ditches, streams etc. The basic duty of responsibility for ordinary watercourses remains with the landowner Land Drainage Act Other duties include maintaining a register of locations or features that may have a significant effect on flood risk, and drawing up and maintaining a Flood Risk Management Strategy.
What will the Council do in a flood? The Council works with the Emergency Services and the Environment Agency to co-ordinate responses during severe flooding. It also:. The Environment Agency is responsible for flood risk management activities on main rivers, regulating reservoir safety, and providing river flood warnings.
It has powers to undertake work on main rivers to fix flooding issues. Contact the Environment Agency if you are having a flooding issue from a main river, reservoir, or if you wish to carry out work on a main river. This agreement prescribes that insurers must always include flood cover as standard for domestic properties and small businesses in low-risk areas built before and allow such properties in higher risk areas who already have flood cover to automatically renew this with the same insurer.
The Association of British Insurers has recently confirmed that they will not be renewing the Statement of Principles. There is a considerable political background to this decision, but the main reasons appear to be that they do not feel that the Government has done enough to improve flood defences and that having to provide or renew cover is driving insurance premiums upwards. If the damage is caused by a burst water main, the landlord should contact the relevant water company as soon as possible.
For flooding arising from natural causes, it is becoming more and more difficult and expensive to obtain insurance cover for flooding. In areas at particularly high risk, landlords should ensure that they will be able to obtain flood cover and should check the terms of their leases if not. Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly.
This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information. Undefined cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet. Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
0コメント