What’s the Issue?

Over the past thirty years, the science guiding how we manage our rivers has been evolving to emphasize the river as a whole system. Past approaches prioritized constraining the river into a stable and predictable channel to control the delivery of water downstream and reduce chances of the river overflowing its banks and flooding adjacent communities. This approach has devastated river health and degraded the multitude of essential ecosystem benefits that sustain our communities, economies, and the environment.

Many states and local governments, and some Tribal governments, have developed programs and regulations to limit what structures and activities are allowed in the floodplain. Those regulations are usually tied to the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and emergency management agency guidelines associated with federal or state flood insurance and assistance. The “management” of the floodplain has been driven by the desire to avoid costly damage to human life or physical property through hazard mitigation rather than holistic floodplain management approaches.

An emerging tool in the resiliency adaptation toolbox aligns the management of water resources, land use changes, and potential hazards to improve benefits for communities and the environment in an equitable manner. There are many names for this new paradigm—nature based solutions, integrated river basin management, integrated floodplain management (IFM), and more—but the underlying tenet is the same. Rivers need adequate space for the natural processes that create the multiple benefits our communities, economies, and the environment rely upon to be healthy and resilient.

To maintain a healthy, functioning river requires managing the entire river corridor—the river channel, all of the floodplain, the riparian areas and wetlands, and the connected aquifer—as a single interdependent system. Rather than trying to change the way the river behaves, various IFM models acknowledge that river systems are dynamic and require space within the river corridor for the natural processes including high and low flows, flood water storage in adjacent floodplains, and sediment deposition and transport.

Below, we take a closer look at examples from Washington and Vermont where those states have developed IFM programs that help break down the silos across entities involved in protection and restoration of rivers and floodplains and adjacent communities.

Examples of State Policy and Lessons from the Network

Vermont

• Vermont Functioning Floodplains Initiative
• Lessons from the Network: Mike Kline

Washington

• Floodplains by Design
• Lessons from the Network: Floodplains by Design

Additional Resources

• Association of State Floodplain Managers State and Local Floodplain Management Program Assessments
• Integrated Watershed Management – Association of State Floodplain Managers and National Association of Wetland Managers partnership with EPA for training on integration of Clean Water Act Programs, natural hazard mitigation planning, and implementation to reduce flood risk and improve water quality
• The Power of the Watershed Approach for Floodplain Management
• Carson River Watershed Regional Floodplain Management Plan 2008
• How Nature is Taming Policy: A Watershed Approach to Flood Risk Management
  

Development of the State Policy Approaches to Floodplain Restoration and Protection State Policy Hub category was led by
Gayle Killam with Water Policy Pathways

Floodplain Restoration & Protection Policy Database

Our friends at American Rivers are developing their 50 State Floodplain Strategy as well. We will include additional information here as it becomes available.