8/26/24 – On Thursday night, 8/22/24, Doctor Arelia Johnson addressed the Harris County Community Flood Resilience Task Force about Harris County’s new definition of equity. Dr. Johnson is the County’s new Chief Equity Officer and has been in her job only three weeks. She has a PhD in sociology and criminology from Howard University. You can watch the video of her talk on YouTube. It begins at five minutes and ten seconds into the meeting. Below is a transcript of her talk up to the point where she started taking questions from the audience.
Introductory slide from Dr. Johnson’s talk.
Host: Whenever you’re ready Doctor Johnson, just let me know and I’ll help you advance through your slides.
Johnson: Thank you so much Amanda. This is Doctor Arelia Johnson. My pronouns are she, her, hers. And I am the chief equity officer for Harris County. And so, we’re going to talk about equity and where we are in this process of creating this foundational work and analysis.
Racism, Sexism Declared Public Health Crisis
In June, 2020, Commissioners Court declared racism and sexism a public health crisis, and they then began to move towards creating a space for chief equity officer in 2021. The county then created its initial guidelines and definition for equity, and then more recently, we were able to update a definition that was more in alignment with the strategic planning that we’re doing.
Current Definition of Equity
This particular definition feeds into our framework, which is three parts of the model. And we’ll talk about that shortly. But our definition as it stands right now is…
“Equity is the actionable pursuit of recognizing that there are groups who have disproportionately benefited from inequities, and others who have had the burden of solving the problems that have been created by inequities.”
In other words…
“Equity is the actionable commitment to significantly reduce the disparity in the distribution of benefits and the actionable commitment in reducing the burdens of aligning and embedding goals, objectives, and outcomes related to inclusivity and accessibility to the historically marginalized.”
Benefiting From or Being Hurt Disproportionally
Now, what does that mean? I’m glad you all asked. When we’re talking about equity, we have historically talked about equity in very vague, abstract ways. We have these huge aspirational goals, as if we can undo 250 years’ worth of work institutionalizing disparity.
However, we have to take a step back. And so, that’s what we’ve done as a county. We are taking a step back to figure out what can we do to recognize that there have been groups, multiple groups, who have benefited from disproportionality.
And then there have been multiple groups who have not benefited from disproportionality and who have been tasked with the burden, whether it’s the emotional labor, the physical labor, the social-political labor of solving the problems that inequity has caused and that has resulted in disparate treatment and what those consequences are.
Equity is a conscious practice. It’s something that we are grounding in research, and it is informed by data that actively engages and addresses the historical, cultural and institutional dynamics and structures that privilege some and disadvantaged others.
Mitigating History
So, when you’re thinking about being a task force that wants to mitigate some of the flooding issues that we’re having, how do you then ground what you’re doing in research? How do you actively address the historical, cultural, institutional and structural dynamics?
And how do you know that you’re doing that? One of the tools that you can use is by actively engaging committees like this one, to where you can have a myriad of lenses and lived experiences at the table, to where you can hear from all of those different perspectives.
There are three ways that we are looking at equity structurally, which is achieved when we take all of those dynamics that I just talked about into consideration.
What is the historical context? How have certain groups been ignored or underserved or underprivileged?
What are the cultural contexts? Are there biases or perspectives that are involved with dealing with the historically marginalized?
What are the institutional dynamics that have traditionally privileged some and disadvantaged others?
Structural Equity
Now you’re talking about systems and systematic oppression, which does happen. It has structural consequences, especially when you’re talking about which areas are being served and which areas are going to be the hardest hit.
Those are some of the things that we need to consider from a structural perspective.
Structural equity also seeks to rectify underlying structures, frameworks and policies and practices.
Procedural Equity
Procedural equity is more about the development and implementation of equitable distribution and sustainability. We want to look at standard operating procedures.
What are those practices? How do we then create impact within those communities, not just in word but also in deed, and making sure that those populations are groups that are not otherwise considered:
One, have a seat at the table so they can have consideration,
Two, they can also help with these efforts instead of those efforts being done for them.
Socio-Emotionally-Intelligent Equity
And then you have socio-emotionally-intelligent equity. I think this is probably one of the things that we have to work hard because we have all been socialized and conditioned to some extent.
This form of equity helps us to increase the capacity to recognize, understand and address and then mitigate the impacts of interpersonal, individual, structural, systemic and institutional racism and sexism on the well-being of others.
Aligning with Commissioner’s Court Priorities
We think this is really important as a county, because we want to be in alignment with all of the resolutions that are coming out of commissioner’s court. But then, we also want to be able to take a step back and be introspective and reflective when having interactions with others.
Must Work on Unconscious Biases
Sometimes our implicit biases are our unconscious biases seep into interactions. It’s not because we intend on being harmful. Sometimes we are completely unaware that we are being harmful.
And so, this is something that we really have to work on. And it has to be very intentional and conscious.
Socio-emotionally intelligent equity is locational or context specific, which means that you have to recognize where you are, your generational context, your historical context, your social context, your political context, and recognize it and recognize that sometimes we assume things to the detriment of progress.
What you may be experiencing with someone, if it looks like anger, may not actually be anger, it may be frustration or disappointment.
And so doing all of those things, what it does for us, it helps promote a uniform starting place, which means that then we go into this place of what training looks like, what a shared language looks like, what commonality looks like.
So, those are the three components of our equity framework and our definition.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/26/24
2554 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/2024-08-22-CFRTF-General-Meeting-Slide-Deck-_FINAL_Page_07.jpg?fit=2000%2C1125&ssl=111252000adminadmin2024-08-26 17:39:182024-08-26 18:49:08Harris County’s New Definition of Equity
8/25/2024 – An investigation by the Associated Press shined a light on how information is being withheld by the government that affects flood risk below dams. The secrecy also affects the cost of flood insurance that residents below dams pay.
West Fork and US59 after 2017 release from Lake Conroe during Hurricane Harvey. Floodwaters stretched 2 miles wide.
It begins, “Conflicting federal policies may force thousands of residents in flood-prone areas to pay more for flood insurance or be left unaware of danger posed by dams built upstream from their homes and worksites, according to an Associated Press review of federal records and data.”
Lieb continues, “The problem stems from a complex set of flood policies and some national security precautions taken after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.”
Lieb covers recent emergency repairs in Georgia, Minnesota, New York, South Carolina, Texas and Wisconsin, forcing evacuations and costly repairs.
Let me try to summarize the essence of Lieb’s excellent research and articles. But first, lest you think this doesn’t affect you, let me remind you of a local example.
Local Example: Lake Livingston
Emergency repairs to the Lake Livingston Dam were made public earlier this year after 20 inches of rain fell upstream from the dam. Releases washed out some areas below it. But the nature of the repairs and who would be affected if the dam failed were kept under raps due to federal policies, according to the AP.
Key Takeaways from First AP Story
The AP Reports blame recent intense storms and aging dams on a series of emergency repairs and outright dam failures.
According to AP, “Conflicting federal policies may be inhibiting the ability of local officials to share details with residents, businesses and other property owners about the places that get could inundated with floodwaters if a dam were to fail. That same information gap also could be costing residents more for flood insurance.”
Below are some takeaways from the AP’s report on the conflicting federal policies.
Flood Insurance Discounts vs. Secrecy of Inundation Data In Event of Dam Failure
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) oversees the national flood-insurance program. FEMA also oversees the Community Rating System that offers discounts on flood insurance to communities that score high on flood safety measures.
A community that earns the best rankings (Class 1) earns its residents 45% discounts on their flood-insurance premiums. “But,” says Lieb, “it’s not easy to achieve. Just two of the 1,500 local governments taking part in the Community Rating System have earned the top discount for their residents.” That’s 0.13%.
Why only two? The Community Rating System focuses in part on dams. Receiving a Class 1 ranking requires communities “to maintain maps showing the homes, businesses and critical facilities that could get inundated with floodwaters if a dam were to fail,” says Lieb. The communities must also warn residents. But only four out of 1,500 communities nationwide have earned any credit for their local efforts regarding flood risk below dams.
Secrecy about Dams and Indundation Stems from 9/11
Some federal agencies have prohibited the release of inundation maps for dams that they own or regulate, a legacy of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. They fear dams could become targets,
The Bureau of Reclamation, which owns 430 dams requires non-disclosure agreements when sharing dam inundation maps and emergency action plans with local officials. “That has inhibited officials from sharing specific information about the risks of dam failures with residents who could get flooded,” says Lieb.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulates about 1,800 power-producing dams. It too says dam inundation maps “could be useful to a person planning an attack.” FERC requires those receiving such information to sign non-disclosure agreements.
It took AP nearly two-and-half years after the news organization submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to FEMA to obtain the information regarding flood risk below dams that can cost homeowners money and lives.
Are Changes Coming?
The Bureau of Reclamation said it is revising its policies and will start allowing communities to publicly share information about dam inundation zones, including:
Potential flood-wave travel times
Flood depths and durations.
The Bureau said changes will begin in 2025, but will take 8+ years to complete.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers also has become more transparent. The Corps began posting dam inundation maps online in late 2021 after determining that releasing the information “is more beneficial to the public than any risk of misuse.”
“The information is more beneficial to the public than any risk of misuse.”
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in 2021 as reported by the AP
FEMA is considering potential changes to the Community Rating System for flood insurance.
This summer, FEMA opened a public comment period on potential changes to the Community Rating System. People can submit suggestions regarding flood risk below dams through Sept. 9. But FEMA doesn’t expect to make any changes until 2026 at the earliest, according to Lieb.
Flood Insurance Discounts in Houston and Harris County
Lieb’s second story focuses largely on the impacts to individual communities. It points out that FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program is available in 22,692 communities that have adopted and enforced floodplain management regulations.
Premium discounts range from 5% to 45%.
City of Houston’s 128,767 policy holders pay NFIP premiums totaling $38.71 billion thanks to a 25% community discount.
However, 97,365 NFIP policy holders in unincorporated Harris County pay $31.31 billion. They get a 15% discount.
Thus, Houston and Harris County earn up to 20-30% less in discounts than they otherwise might.
Proximity to abandoned sand mines can bring down home values. But with care, abandoned sand mines can also become community assets. People and planning can make the difference.
Ever since Hurricane Harvey when mountains of sand blocked the San Jacinto West Fork, contributing to the flooding of thousands of homes and businesses, I have predominantly focused on the negative consequences of sand mining. But a recent experience with ChatGPT 40 gave me a glimmer of hope.
ChatGPT 40 Experience
I started peppering the AI bot with questions about sand mining. Here’s the entire 58 page list of questions and responses. The last one I asked opened my eyes to new possibilities:
“Can you list case studies of sand pits near rivers that have been successfully repurposed.”
Within seconds ChatGPT came up with five. See the bot response verbatim below.
ChatGPT said:
Yes, there are several case studies where sand pits near rivers have been successfully repurposed. These examples demonstrate how abandoned sand mines can be transformed into valuable community resources or natural habitats with proper planning and management.
1. The Maasplassen, Netherlands
Background: The Maasplassen region in the Netherlands consists of a series of lakes created by sand and gravel extraction along the Meuse River (Maas). Over the years, these pits were repurposed into recreational areas and natural reserves.
Repurposing Strategy: The Dutch government, in collaboration with local municipalities and environmental organizations, transformed these former sand pits into a network of lakes that serve multiple purposes, including water sports, nature conservation, and tourism.
Successes: The area now supports diverse ecosystems and provides recreational opportunities like sailing, fishing, and swimming. It has become a popular destination for both locals and tourists, contributing to the regional economy while also enhancing biodiversity.
2. Chattahoochee RiverLands, Georgia, USA
Background: Along the Chattahoochee River in Georgia, several abandoned sand and gravel pits were left after decades of mining operations. These pits were identified as potential sites for repurposing as part of a larger vision to create the Chattahoochee RiverLands greenway.
Repurposing Strategy: The project involves converting these pits into natural areas and parks that are integrated into a broader greenway system. Plans include restoring native vegetation, creating trails, and ensuring public access to the river.
Successes: While the project is ongoing, it has already seen success in terms of community engagement and environmental restoration. The repurposing efforts aim to reconnect people with the river, enhance flood resilience, and create wildlife corridors.
3. Tinsley Green Sand Quarry, South Yorkshire, UK
Background: The Tinsley Green sand quarry, located near the River Don in South Yorkshire, was a large sand extraction site that became disused in the late 20th century.
Repurposing Strategy: The site was transformed into a wetland nature reserve, known as Tinsley Green Wetlands, through a combination of regrading, habitat creation, and community involvement. The focus was on creating habitats for birds, amphibians, and other wildlife.
Successes: The wetland now supports a wide range of species, including several that are rare or protected. It has become a key site for biodiversity in the region and is used for environmental education and passive recreation.
4. The Little Miami River, Ohio, USA
Background: Along the Little Miami River in Ohio, several sand and gravel pits were abandoned after mining activities ceased. These sites were initially left unmanaged, posing environmental risks.
Repurposing Strategy: Local authorities and environmental groups collaborated to restore these pits into wetland areas and floodplain habitats. The efforts included soil remediation, reforestation, and the creation of wildlife habitats.
Successes: The restored areas now provide flood control benefits, support a rich array of wildlife, and have become important recreational and educational resources for the surrounding communities.
5. Angler’s Paradise, United Kingdom
Background: A sand and gravel pit in Devon, England, was transformed into a well-known fishing and leisure destination known as Angler’s Paradise.
Repurposing Strategy: The site was creatively repurposed by stocking the lakes with various fish species and developing facilities for anglers and tourists. The project also focused on enhancing the natural beauty of the area through landscaping and the creation of wildlife habitats.
Successes: Angler’s Paradise is now a popular destination for anglers and nature enthusiasts. It contributes to the local economy through tourism while also maintaining a focus on environmental stewardship and habitat preservation.
These case studies illustrate that with careful planning, community involvement, and a focus on sustainability, abandoned sand pits near rivers can be successfully repurposed into assets that benefit both people and the environment.
I quickly looked them up using a conventional search engine. I began to see some potential with the very first one. It led me to wonder whether something like these could work in the San Jacinto watershed.
The thing we’ve never had that all these examples had is a long-term vision that united parties with disparate interests. They include miners, trade associations, environmentalists, residents, regulators, developers, county leaders, and more.
Perhaps it could be done with careful planning and the cooperation of committed people who shared a long term goal.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/23/24
2551 Days after Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/20210505-DJI_0724.jpg?fit=1200%2C900&ssl=19001200adminadmin2024-08-23 19:45:082024-08-23 19:48:42How Abandoned Sand Mines Can Become Community Assets
Harris County’s New Definition of Equity
8/26/24 – On Thursday night, 8/22/24, Doctor Arelia Johnson addressed the Harris County Community Flood Resilience Task Force about Harris County’s new definition of equity. Dr. Johnson is the County’s new Chief Equity Officer and has been in her job only three weeks. She has a PhD in sociology and criminology from Howard University. You can watch the video of her talk on YouTube. It begins at five minutes and ten seconds into the meeting. Below is a transcript of her talk up to the point where she started taking questions from the audience.
Host: Whenever you’re ready Doctor Johnson, just let me know and I’ll help you advance through your slides.
Johnson: Thank you so much Amanda. This is Doctor Arelia Johnson. My pronouns are she, her, hers. And I am the chief equity officer for Harris County. And so, we’re going to talk about equity and where we are in this process of creating this foundational work and analysis.
Racism, Sexism Declared Public Health Crisis
In June, 2020, Commissioners Court declared racism and sexism a public health crisis, and they then began to move towards creating a space for chief equity officer in 2021. The county then created its initial guidelines and definition for equity, and then more recently, we were able to update a definition that was more in alignment with the strategic planning that we’re doing.
Current Definition of Equity
This particular definition feeds into our framework, which is three parts of the model. And we’ll talk about that shortly. But our definition as it stands right now is…
“Equity is the actionable pursuit of recognizing that there are groups who have disproportionately benefited from inequities, and others who have had the burden of solving the problems that have been created by inequities.”
In other words…
“Equity is the actionable commitment to significantly reduce the disparity in the distribution of benefits and the actionable commitment in reducing the burdens of aligning and embedding goals, objectives, and outcomes related to inclusivity and accessibility to the historically marginalized.”
Benefiting From or Being Hurt Disproportionally
Now, what does that mean? I’m glad you all asked. When we’re talking about equity, we have historically talked about equity in very vague, abstract ways. We have these huge aspirational goals, as if we can undo 250 years’ worth of work institutionalizing disparity.
However, we have to take a step back. And so, that’s what we’ve done as a county. We are taking a step back to figure out what can we do to recognize that there have been groups, multiple groups, who have benefited from disproportionality.
And then there have been multiple groups who have not benefited from disproportionality and who have been tasked with the burden, whether it’s the emotional labor, the physical labor, the social-political labor of solving the problems that inequity has caused and that has resulted in disparate treatment and what those consequences are.
Equity is a conscious practice. It’s something that we are grounding in research, and it is informed by data that actively engages and addresses the historical, cultural and institutional dynamics and structures that privilege some and disadvantaged others.
Mitigating History
So, when you’re thinking about being a task force that wants to mitigate some of the flooding issues that we’re having, how do you then ground what you’re doing in research? How do you actively address the historical, cultural, institutional and structural dynamics?
And how do you know that you’re doing that? One of the tools that you can use is by actively engaging committees like this one, to where you can have a myriad of lenses and lived experiences at the table, to where you can hear from all of those different perspectives.
There are three ways that we are looking at equity structurally, which is achieved when we take all of those dynamics that I just talked about into consideration.
Structural Equity
Now you’re talking about systems and systematic oppression, which does happen. It has structural consequences, especially when you’re talking about which areas are being served and which areas are going to be the hardest hit.
Those are some of the things that we need to consider from a structural perspective.
Structural equity also seeks to rectify underlying structures, frameworks and policies and practices.
Procedural Equity
Procedural equity is more about the development and implementation of equitable distribution and sustainability. We want to look at standard operating procedures.
What are those practices? How do we then create impact within those communities, not just in word but also in deed, and making sure that those populations are groups that are not otherwise considered:
Socio-Emotionally-Intelligent Equity
And then you have socio-emotionally-intelligent equity. I think this is probably one of the things that we have to work hard because we have all been socialized and conditioned to some extent.
This form of equity helps us to increase the capacity to recognize, understand and address and then mitigate the impacts of interpersonal, individual, structural, systemic and institutional racism and sexism on the well-being of others.
Aligning with Commissioner’s Court Priorities
We think this is really important as a county, because we want to be in alignment with all of the resolutions that are coming out of commissioner’s court. But then, we also want to be able to take a step back and be introspective and reflective when having interactions with others.
Must Work on Unconscious Biases
Sometimes our implicit biases are our unconscious biases seep into interactions. It’s not because we intend on being harmful. Sometimes we are completely unaware that we are being harmful.
And so, this is something that we really have to work on. And it has to be very intentional and conscious.
Socio-emotionally intelligent equity is locational or context specific, which means that you have to recognize where you are, your generational context, your historical context, your social context, your political context, and recognize it and recognize that sometimes we assume things to the detriment of progress.
What you may be experiencing with someone, if it looks like anger, may not actually be anger, it may be frustration or disappointment.
And so doing all of those things, what it does for us, it helps promote a uniform starting place, which means that then we go into this place of what training looks like, what a shared language looks like, what commonality looks like.
So, those are the three components of our equity framework and our definition.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/26/24
2554 Days since Hurricane Harvey
AP Reports Shine Light on Secrecy of Flood Risk Below Dams
8/25/2024 – An investigation by the Associated Press shined a light on how information is being withheld by the government that affects flood risk below dams. The secrecy also affects the cost of flood insurance that residents below dams pay.
Two Related Stories
A copyrighted story by David A. Lieb published by AP on 8/23/2024 was titled, “Takeaways from AP’s report on federal policies shielding information about potential dam failures.”
The story begins with, “Thousands of people live downstream from dams yet may not always realize the risks.”
On 8/24/24, Lieb wrote a related followup story also published by AP. It was titled, “Conflicting federal policies may cost residents more on flood insurance, and leave them at risk.”
It begins, “Conflicting federal policies may force thousands of residents in flood-prone areas to pay more for flood insurance or be left unaware of danger posed by dams built upstream from their homes and worksites, according to an Associated Press review of federal records and data.”
Lieb continues, “The problem stems from a complex set of flood policies and some national security precautions taken after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.”
Lieb covers recent emergency repairs in Georgia, Minnesota, New York, South Carolina, Texas and Wisconsin, forcing evacuations and costly repairs.
Let me try to summarize the essence of Lieb’s excellent research and articles. But first, lest you think this doesn’t affect you, let me remind you of a local example.
Local Example: Lake Livingston
Emergency repairs to the Lake Livingston Dam were made public earlier this year after 20 inches of rain fell upstream from the dam. Releases washed out some areas below it. But the nature of the repairs and who would be affected if the dam failed were kept under raps due to federal policies, according to the AP.
Key Takeaways from First AP Story
The AP Reports blame recent intense storms and aging dams on a series of emergency repairs and outright dam failures.
According to AP, “Conflicting federal policies may be inhibiting the ability of local officials to share details with residents, businesses and other property owners about the places that get could inundated with floodwaters if a dam were to fail. That same information gap also could be costing residents more for flood insurance.”
Below are some takeaways from the AP’s report on the conflicting federal policies.
Flood Insurance Discounts vs. Secrecy of Inundation Data In Event of Dam Failure
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) oversees the national flood-insurance program. FEMA also oversees the Community Rating System that offers discounts on flood insurance to communities that score high on flood safety measures.
A community that earns the best rankings (Class 1) earns its residents 45% discounts on their flood-insurance premiums. “But,” says Lieb, “it’s not easy to achieve. Just two of the 1,500 local governments taking part in the Community Rating System have earned the top discount for their residents.” That’s 0.13%.
Why only two? The Community Rating System focuses in part on dams. Receiving a Class 1 ranking requires communities “to maintain maps showing the homes, businesses and critical facilities that could get inundated with floodwaters if a dam were to fail,” says Lieb. The communities must also warn residents. But only four out of 1,500 communities nationwide have earned any credit for their local efforts regarding flood risk below dams.
Secrecy about Dams and Indundation Stems from 9/11
Some federal agencies have prohibited the release of inundation maps for dams that they own or regulate, a legacy of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. They fear dams could become targets,
The Bureau of Reclamation, which owns 430 dams requires non-disclosure agreements when sharing dam inundation maps and emergency action plans with local officials. “That has inhibited officials from sharing specific information about the risks of dam failures with residents who could get flooded,” says Lieb.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulates about 1,800 power-producing dams. It too says dam inundation maps “could be useful to a person planning an attack.” FERC requires those receiving such information to sign non-disclosure agreements.
It took AP nearly two-and-half years after the news organization submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to FEMA to obtain the information regarding flood risk below dams that can cost homeowners money and lives.
Are Changes Coming?
The Bureau of Reclamation said it is revising its policies and will start allowing communities to publicly share information about dam inundation zones, including:
The Bureau said changes will begin in 2025, but will take 8+ years to complete.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers also has become more transparent. The Corps began posting dam inundation maps online in late 2021 after determining that releasing the information “is more beneficial to the public than any risk of misuse.”
FEMA is considering potential changes to the Community Rating System for flood insurance.
This summer, FEMA opened a public comment period on potential changes to the Community Rating System. People can submit suggestions regarding flood risk below dams through Sept. 9. But FEMA doesn’t expect to make any changes until 2026 at the earliest, according to Lieb.
Flood Insurance Discounts in Houston and Harris County
Lieb’s second story focuses largely on the impacts to individual communities. It points out that FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program is available in 22,692 communities that have adopted and enforced floodplain management regulations.
Premium discounts range from 5% to 45%.
City of Houston’s 128,767 policy holders pay NFIP premiums totaling $38.71 billion thanks to a 25% community discount.
However, 97,365 NFIP policy holders in unincorporated Harris County pay $31.31 billion. They get a 15% discount.
Thus, Houston and Harris County earn up to 20-30% less in discounts than they otherwise might.
One can only wonder how many people would have built farther back from rivers downstream from Lake Conroe and Lake Houston had they had the dam information. The SJRA consistently cites the risk of dam failure with every release during a major flood.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/25/24
2553 Days since Hurricane Harvey
How Abandoned Sand Mines Can Become Community Assets
Proximity to abandoned sand mines can bring down home values. But with care, abandoned sand mines can also become community assets. People and planning can make the difference.
Ever since Hurricane Harvey when mountains of sand blocked the San Jacinto West Fork, contributing to the flooding of thousands of homes and businesses, I have predominantly focused on the negative consequences of sand mining. But a recent experience with ChatGPT 40 gave me a glimmer of hope.
ChatGPT 40 Experience
I started peppering the AI bot with questions about sand mining. Here’s the entire 58 page list of questions and responses. The last one I asked opened my eyes to new possibilities:
Within seconds ChatGPT came up with five. See the bot response verbatim below.
ChatGPT said:
Yes, there are several case studies where sand pits near rivers have been successfully repurposed. These examples demonstrate how abandoned sand mines can be transformed into valuable community resources or natural habitats with proper planning and management.
1. The Maasplassen, Netherlands
2. Chattahoochee RiverLands, Georgia, USA
3. Tinsley Green Sand Quarry, South Yorkshire, UK
4. The Little Miami River, Ohio, USA
5. Angler’s Paradise, United Kingdom
These case studies illustrate that with careful planning, community involvement, and a focus on sustainability, abandoned sand pits near rivers can be successfully repurposed into assets that benefit both people and the environment.
I quickly looked them up using a conventional search engine. I began to see some potential with the very first one. It led me to wonder whether something like these could work in the San Jacinto watershed.
The thing we’ve never had that all these examples had is a long-term vision that united parties with disparate interests. They include miners, trade associations, environmentalists, residents, regulators, developers, county leaders, and more.
Perhaps it could be done with careful planning and the cooperation of committed people who shared a long term goal.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/23/24
2551 Days after Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.