To sink or swim

Happy Saturday to all our loyal readers. I assume and hope that theirs is happier than mine, as I've had the distinct displeasure of watching helplessly as my computer tries to fight back the miserable "Tukpat" trojan malware that it somehow contracted. Strangely enough, the virus appeared only after having our local Best Buy examine a problem with the video card. Damn Geek Squad. 

Anywho, I've got some time on my hands while I wait for my computer to get finished downloading the latest Windows Service Pack, so I have been browsing the news. NPR wrote an interesting article that documents the decision made on the part of Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) officials to release water from spillways on the Missouri River. It goes into how they make the decision, what guides their thinking, etc. It's an interesting read for anyone who's interested in why the ACE chose to ruin the livelihoods of our defenseless agricultural producers. However, it did get me thinking, "Why is this such a tough decision?"

* * * * * 

From the economic perspective, the choice of whether to flood farmland cultivated in the middle of a floodplain or a city filled with thousands -- nay, millions -- of people is simple [1]; you flood the farmland. 

It doesn't take an extensive cost-benefit analysis to figure that a few thousand acres of cropland is less valuable than a city filled with people. If I recall correctly, the average value of a statistical life is somewhere around $4.6 million, so it doesn't take many fatalities to completely overwhelm any losses that could be felt by farmers. And that's not even considering property damage, lost industrial production or tourism revenues, etc. Plus, as mentioned above, the farmers rent or own land in a floodplain. The fact is that the rent or price they pay to farm the land incorporates the expectation that, from time to time, they'll need to trade in their moldboard plows for a kayak. If it doesn't, then the farmers are suckers [2].

Let's not misconstrue my words here, though; I truly feel sympathetic towards farmers whose livelihoods are damaged -- be it temporarily or permanently -- by the floods. And I understand that a tremendous amount of politics must go into the debate about who to flood out. But it's not a difficult decision.

------------------------------------------

1. Nevermind that, in this case, the city in question (whether it be New Orleans or some other city) is foolishly built in a floodplain; it's a sunk cost, so we're stuck with it for now.

2. Which explains why farmers who try to sue the ACE for intentionally flooding their land are both insane and stupid.