I just read this post by Redneck Mother, which you should read, too.
I’ll wait here.
Here’s my question. Could New Orleans have a safer life, granted, as a smaller city, if the main branch of the Mississippi didn’t run through it?
It’s clear that the river is trying to flip main channels and run to the Gulf through the Atchafalaya River. At this point, why are we stopping it? Doesn’t it seem more reasonable to tell people right now, “Hey, the river’s coming and we can’t stop it. Yes, voluntarily giving up your towns (and granted we will lose some towns) is going to be rough. But a lot less rough that what will happen when the river finds its way around what we’ve done.” And this seems to me like it would take a lot of the strain off the levees in New Orleans along the river.
I don’t know. Clearly, there are some holes in my reasoning.
But I’m just curious as to why we don’t let the river do what rivers do, especially since artificially keeping it from doing that seems to be exacerbating a problem.