Flood control along the Mississippi River is a central piece of a newly passed federal law — work that advocates believe is critical as the river basin sees more frequent and severe extreme weather events due to climate change. 

The Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) is passed by Congress every two years. It gives authority to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to undertake projects and studies to improve the nation’s water resources. 

Signed into law Jan. 4, this year’s package includes studies on increased flooding in the upper basin, flood mitigation measures throughout the river system, ecological restoration, and a $6 billion floodwall in Louisiana. 

The Mississippi River is managed in large part by the Army Corps, so it often features prominently in the bill, with a dual aim of making the river more suitable for shipping and restoring environmental degradation from flooding, nutrient pollution and climate change. 

Kirsten Wallace, executive director of the Upper Mississippi River Basin Association, called this year’s WRDA “a pretty special one.” She said it contained wins for many of the diverse stakeholders along the river, including shippers, environmental advocates, riverfront communities and federal and state agencies — who don’t always agree. 

Advocates lauded the law’s emphasis on nature-based solutions. In a press release, Stephanie Bailenson, policy team lead for The Nature Conservancy, said, “Since 2016, Congress has directed the corps to consider natural and nature-based solutions alongside or instead of traditional infrastructure. This latest act continues that trend.”

But all of these projects are only promised because funding doesn’t come until later, when Congress appropriates it. Many projects authorized in previous versions of the law are still unfunded, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Here’s what will affect the river in the Water Resources Development Act of 2024: 

Study of flood risk on the upper Mississippi River

The law authorizes a large-scale study of flooding on the Upper Mississippi River System, which includes the Mississippi River from its headwaters to where it meets the Ohio River at Cairo, Illinois, as well as the Illinois River and portions of some smaller tributaries.

The upper river has seen two major floods in the last few years: one in 2023 and one in 2019, which lasted for months and caused billions of dollars in damage. 

The study’s chief goal: figuring out how to reduce flood risk across the entire river system, instead of relying on municipalities to try to solve flooding problems themselves, which can sometimes have impacts downstream. North of St. Louis, for example, levees constrain the river to protect communities and valuable farmland from flooding — and some levee districts have raised those levees higher, safeguarding themselves but effectively pushing floodwaters faster downstream. 

“This plan allows more of a comprehensive way for levee districts to improve what they currently have … in a way that doesn’t put them in a position to be adversarial or just impose risk somewhere else,” Wallace said. 

She said the study will be a challenge, but that levee districts are eager for solutions as flood risks and heavier rainfall increase. 

Once the study receives funding, it will be led by the Army Corps’ St. Louis District, Wallace said. It’ll solicit input from cities, towns and ports along the river, recreators, the shipping industry and federal environmental agencies like the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Geological Survey. 

Flood projects for cities from the headwaters to the delta 

Cities and towns along the river could get help for the localized effects of flooding too, thanks to several projects authorized by the law. Upstream, that includes La Crosse, Wisconsin, which will enter into an agreement with the Army Corps to study the role of the city’s levees, which were constructed around the river’s record flood in 1965. 

“We have to have an eye on maintaining what we’ve got and looking toward the future and whatever conditions the river might undergo to be prepared as best we can,” said Matthew Gallager, the city’s director of engineering and public works. “Because obviously, nature is going to win.” 

Downriver, Louisiana secured the largest project authorization within the law. To protect communities in St. Tammany Parish, a county north of Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana, plans to build a $5.9 billion levee and floodwall system totaling 18.5 miles in length to protect over 26,000 structures, most of which are family homes. 

The St. Tammany Flood Risk Management Project is slated to receive $3.7 billion in federal funding. The other 35% will come from non-federal sponsors, such as the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority (CPRA). 

“By authorizing the St. Tammany project for construction, Congress recognizes again the national importance of Louisiana and that CPRA can work with the federal government to execute a multi-billion coastal protection project successfully,” said CPRA Chairman Gordy Dove.

The law also authorizes a federal study of the Lake Pontchartrain Storm Surge Reduction Project, a component of Louisiana’s Coastal Master Plan meant to protect nine parishes bordering the lake. The Army Corps will investigate whether the proposed project to reduce flood risk is in the federal interest. 

Other approved flood control projects will be funded along the lower Mississippi River and its tributaries, including the Ouachita River in Louisiana. Several counties in Mississippi will also receive funding to improve environmental infrastructure, such as water and wastewater systems. 

Near Memphis, the bill authorizes the Hatchie-Loosahatchie Ecosystem Restoration project, which covers a 39-mile stretch of the lower Mississippi River. The project aims to manage flood risks while also restoring and sustaining the health, productivity and biological diversity of the flyway. 

In New Orleans, a study was authorized to investigate ecosystem restoration and water supply issues, such as the mitigation of future saltwater wedges that threaten drinking water and wetlands at the very end of the Mississippi River. 

More support for the Upper Mississippi River Restoration program 

The law also increases the amount of money Congress can give to the Upper Mississippi River Restoration program, which funds habitat restoration activities and scientific research on the upper river. 

Congress increased the money it can direct to the research part of the program by $10 million, bringing the total the program can get to $100 million annually. 

The funding boost “really is a recognition of the value of the science … the understanding that has improved about how the system is functioning over the last three decades,” said Marshall Plumley, the Army Corps’ regional manager for the program. 

If given extra funding, Plumley said program staff want to use it to better understand the effects of the increased amount of water that has flowed through the river in recent years. That increase, partly attributed to wetter conditions due to climate change, is changing the river’s floodplain habitats, including forests and backwater areas. 

A change to how new water infrastructure gets funded

The Mississippi River functions as a water superhighway, transporting around $500 million tons of goods each year. Infrastructure to keep shipping running smoothly is costly, and one adjustment in WRDA 2024 is aimed at shifting the burden of those costs. 

Taxpayers have been funding inland waterway infrastructure for nearly two centuries, but in 1978 Congress established the Inland Waterways Trust Fund, which requires the private shipping industry to pitch in. 

Today, the trust fund’s coffers are filled by a 29-cent per gallon diesel tax on commercial operators that use the Mississippi River and other inland waterways, adding up to about $125 million per year in recent years. New construction — like wider, more modern locks and dams on the upper river — is paid for through a public-private partnership: the private dollars in the fund, and federal dollars allocated by Congress. 

Until recently, the private dollars covered 35% of new construction costs, and federal dollars covered 65%. The new WRDA adjusts that to 25% and 75%, respectively. 

Advocates for the shipping industry have long believed taxpayers should have a bigger hand in funding construction because it’s not just shippers who benefit from an efficient river. 

The balance in the trust fund “always limits” construction that can happen in a given year, said Jen Armstrong, director of government relations for the Waterways Council. 

“We can’t afford to have projects take three decades or two decades to complete,” Armstrong said, “because we have other locks that are deteriorating.” 

Armstrong said she believes shifting more of the cost to the federal government will accelerate those projects. 

Not everyone supports the cost share change, however, including American Rivers, which has opposed the creation of new locks on the upper Mississippi in favor of helping the river revert to more natural processes. 

Kelsey Cruickshank, the group’s director of policy and government relations, called it “a disappointing development that continues to give short shrift to the incredible ecosystem of the world’s third-largest freshwater river system.”

Editor’s note: A previous version of this story incorrectly stated the upper river experienced major floods in 2022, the floods were in 2023. This story has been updated. 

This story is a product of the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, an editorially independent reporting network based at the University of Missouri School of Journalism in partnership with Report For America and funded by the Walton Family Foundation. Wisconsin Watch is a member of the network. Sign up for our newsletter to get our news straight to your inbox.

New federal law addresses climate extremes and flooding along Mississippi River is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Early on Election Day, highways in the St. Louis area were inundated with water. Over several days, intense storms battered Missouri, bringing six to 10 inches of rain — record-breaking amounts for November.

The flash flooding killed at least five people, including two older poll workers whose vehicle was swept from a state highway.

Mayors along the Mississippi River have watched for years as intensifying rain storms and flooding wreak havoc on their communities.

Take Grafton, Illinois, which escaped Election Day flash flooding but suffered $160,000 to $170,000 in damages from a heavy rain event in July. The town’s main intersection was blocked with logs and debris, and the storm blew out a water line and left streets in need of repair.

But Grafton never received a federal disaster declaration and was not eligible for assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Instead, it paid for road and water line repairs through its Department of Public Works’ annual budget. As a result, the city could no longer purchase new trucks for snow plowing this year, as it had planned.

“What it means is that we’ll limp through another year, keep the vehicles running,” said Grafton Mayor Michael Morrow, who oversees the $1.2 million annual budget for the small riverfront city of about 600.

River communities have suffered repeated losses. But federal disaster funding can take weeks, months or even years to pay out. Traditional insurance programs are tied to property and require proof of loss for a payout, which can be burdensome and lengthy to assemble. 

So this fall, the Mississippi River Cities and Towns Initiative (MRCTI) announced a new insurance pilot, with hopes of better helping river towns recover. 

MRCTI, which represents 105 cities in 10 states in the Mississippi River Basin, including Wisconsin, is working with Munich Re, a German multinational insurance company, to create the insurance product. 

The resulting pilot will test a novel type of insurance pool — called parametric insurance — that is designed to rapidly fund emergency response after natural disasters such as flooding. 

Pilot will test usefulness of new ‘parametric’ insurance policies

The likely cause of intensifying rainfall and floods is human-caused climate change, according to the Fifth National Climate Assessment, a scientific report created every four years for the United States Congress and the president, to help explain the impacts, risks and vulnerabilities associated with a changing global climate.

In 2019, communities in the Basin saw months of flooding, spanning across the Mississippi, Missouri and Arkansas rivers. Reported losses totaled almost $25 billion across at least 17 states, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The central U.S. is emerging as a new flash flooding hotspot, according to research published in Nature’s Communications Earth & Environment journal. With its new role as a hotspot comes more disaster damage – and need for insurance that addresses that.

While conventional indemnity insurance requires insured owners to prove specific losses by amassing evidence and presenting pre-storm documentation, parametric insurance pays out quickly after agreed-upon “triggers” – such as wind speeds or river heights – reach a certain level. 

For the MRCTI pilot, Munich Re has suggested using watershed data from the U.S. Geological Survey to determine the best gauges along the river to measure flood depth. Once the river flooding reaches a certain depth, the payout would be triggered. 

Getting that trigger right is key, said Kathy Baughman McLeod, chief executive officer of Climate Resilience for All, a nonprofit focused on climate adaptation.

“You want to have sufficient understanding of how you set the triggers at a certain place and why,” she said. “There’s a lot of engagement necessary to get everybody on the same page about what the product is, how it works, what the trigger should be.”

The goal of Munich Re’s pilot program is to demonstrate in real time how a parametric insurance payout policy would function in current insurance market conditions and how swift payouts could better assist a city’s disaster response in the immediate days following a flood.

First, Munich Re will develop a mock-up of the insurance policy for one hazard – flooding – with the understanding that multiple hazards, like intense heat, or drought, could be added later, said Colin Wellenkamp, executive director of MRCTI and, as of Nov. 6, a newly elected state representative for Missouri District 105. 

The mock-up would calculate a range of premium costs and theoretical payout options that would be available for cities of varying sizes along the river. But the pilot won’t cost the cities a cent – and it won’t pay them anything either, until the pilot moves into implementation. It’s unclear which entities will ultimately foot the bill of the pilot and eventual product because it’s so early in development.

When Munich Re moves into implementation, individual city governments would hold the policies and receive payouts. Wellenkamp hopes to convince larger corporations that rely on a healthy and functioning Mississippi River hydrology to pick up the tab on the premiums, he said. 

Quick payouts could take burdens off cities

“In the first 24 to 72 hours after a disaster event, very little money can help a whole heck of a lot,” Wellenkamp said. “We use that time for evacuations and to move people out of additional harm’s way in the aftermath.”

But soon after the initial emergency response, municipalities start to look for funds for longer-term cleanup and repair. Under the current paradigm, that money can be hard to tap.  

In the spring of 2019, major flooding on the Mississippi inundated many communities, including Grafton, where the downtown partially closed and people were forced to evacuate. 

The Trump administration didn’t declare a major disaster until September of that year, months after flood waters had receded. It took until 2022 for federal money to reach Grafton, Morrow said.

“The former administration went through that flood,” Morrow said. “I’m the mayor now, and I was getting some of the money that they had put in years ago.”

That wait places stress on a city’s finances, especially smaller ones like Grafton, Morrow added. 

Traditional insurance doesn’t always help either. Grafton has a flood policy, but it only covers property owned by the city. Residents and businesses in the community would need to take out their own flood protection. The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which underwrites many flood insurance policies, has various coverage restrictions. For example, NFIP doesn’t cover roads or wastewater infrastructure. 

The policies also require proof of loss before issuing a check because they cover specific damage, like to a particular building or its contents. This “proof” can take days to document, and longer to process, which delays how fast a local government can begin repairs. Without proper pre-storm documentation, damage can sometimes be nearly impossible to prove.

Parametric insurance – which works with measurable triggers and isn’t tied to documentable losses – could ease the process. 

Cities from the headwaters to the mouth of the Mississippi could buy into the policy, creating a pool that spreads out the risk that any individual community faces. 

“Not every city is going to flood every year, but the flooding will impact at least one section of the river,” said Raghuveer Vinukollu, head of climate insights and advisory for  Munich Re in the U.S.

The insurance pool would protect a town from the risk of ruin, and a more timely payout would increase the town’s resiliency through swift reinvestment in its infrastructure, he added.

Parametric insurance in the Mississippi Delta and beyond

For flooding on rivers, this kind of insurance risk pool is new territory, Vinukollu said. As climate risks become more extreme, the insurance industry is working with a number of communities to address their evolving needs, he said.

While parametric insurance is still developing, one early example stands out to Vinukollu — the Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Facility (CCRIF).

CCRIF pools risk for Caribbean countries, which face hurricane risks each year. By pooling risk together each island can receive a larger payout than if it had taken out an individual policy. 

In July, a mere 14 days after Hurricane Beryl devastated 90% of buildings and agriculture on the islands of Carriacou and Petite Martinique, the government of Grenada received its first payout from CCRIF to fund disaster recovery. 

The tropical cyclone policy paid more than $42 million to Grenada, the largest single payout from CCRIF since its inception in 2007.

In the Mississippi River Basin, Vinukollu hopes to apply this kind of shared risk pool to insure cities at risk for inland flooding. 

“The triggers are different, the perils are different, but the concept is the same,” said Vinukollu.

Given its position near the end of the Mississippi River, New Orleans is no stranger to the devastating impacts of extreme weather. Several city-run institutions, such as NOLA Public Schools, have taken out parametric insurance policies to protect important infrastructure. 

One of the first tests of these policies came in September when Hurricane Francine’s storm surge, rain and winds pelted southern Louisiana. 

But NOLA Public Schools did not receive a payout from its policy with Swiss Re. 

While wind speeds were high, they were not high enough to meet the policy’s triggers of more than 100 miles per hour for one minute.

New Orleans is more likely to experience repetitive, severe losses from named storms than a city in the upper Basin, such as Minneapolis, so cities closer to the Gulf Coast may end up paying higher premiums once the policy officially rolls out, said Wellenkamp, of MRCTI.

Cities that choose to cover more hazards or lower-level disasters may pay higher premiums because it could result in more frequent payouts, Wellenkamp said. Ultimately, municipalities could still end up footing the bill for events like the July flooding in Grafton or the Election Day storms in St. Louis.

McLeod, of Climate Resilience for All, argues communities shouldn’t expect payouts from parametric insurance all that often. “Just by the nature of the product it shouldn’t (pay every year),” she said. “Insurance is for the worst of the worst.”

Munich Re advises that parametric insurance works best to complement – not replace – traditional insurance policies. But company officials believe that these new policies offer the chance for insurance to adapt to changing risk landscapes, as weather events become more extreme.

Despite its potential to facilitate faster disaster response, parametric insurance is no silver bullet, said McLeod. 

The best solution to her is reducing the underlying risk from climate change. 

“The big picture is it’s a really important tool in financing and managing the risks of climate change, and we need every tool,” she said. 

But more than any new financial tool, McLeod said, the most effective financial step would be addressing the root causes of climate change, and building – or rebuilding – more natural protections, like wetlands.

“You’ve got to reduce the risk (or) you won’t be able to afford the insurance on it,” she said. “It’s not insurance if you know this thing is going to happen.”

The Lens’ Marta Jewson contributed reporting to this story.

This story is a product of the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, an editorially independent reporting network based at the University of Missouri School of Journalism in partnership with Report For America and funded by the Walton Family Foundation. Wisconsin Watch is a member of the network. Sign up for our newsletter to get our news straight to your inbox.

Mississippi River towns pilot new insurance model to help with disaster response is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story incorrectly described the locations of river diversions in Louisiana and gave an incorrect date for the upcoming annual Gulf research cruise. This story has been updated. 

Thomas Olander has watched his shrimp catch shrink over the last 15 years. It’s not just the abundance of Louisiana shrimp; Olander said that the average size of the crustacean has also shrunk.

In the past, shrimpers could expect the crustaceans to grow throughout the spring season, which starts in May in Louisiana waters and generally runs through July. “Since we’ve been dealing with this ‘dead zone,’” said Olander, “we’re not seeing that growth no more.”

The dead zone is a stretch along the shallows of the Gulf of Mexico where algae blooms choke off oxygen in the water. 

This month, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) estimated that this summer’s dead zone would reach 5,827 square miles – an area roughly the size of Connecticut. That’s up from approximately 3,058 square miles in 2023. 

These massive algae blooms are caused by nutrients that run off of farms up and down the Mississippi River Basin, which stretches from northern Minnesota to the Gulf of Mexico.

Fertilizer that helps crops grow contains high levels of nitrogen and phosphorus. These nutrients run off the fields during rainstorms at the end of the growing season and end up in waterways leading to the Mississippi River.

In 1996, the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico came to national attention through local reporting. The Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Task Force was established in the fall of 1997 – a collaboration of state, federal and tribal agencies. The group was asked to create and implement an action plan. 

A preliminary goal is to reduce both nitrogen and phosphorus by 20% by 2025. But despite some progress, the task force has not yet met its goals. 

The U.S. Geological Survey showed that in May 2024, while nitrogen loads in the lower Mississippi River were 7% lower than baseline measurements, phosphorus loads increased by 22%. 

The 2025 target is simply not a priority for the task force, said Doug Daigle, a research scientist at Louisiana State University and coordinator of the Louisiana Hypoxia Working Group. He added that neither the task force nor Louisiana attempted to raise funds from Congress to implement programs that would reduce nutrient pollution.

“It’s a problem with the task force, not just Louisiana. There has not been an organized attempt to garner more funding for the action plan,” said Daigle.

Where is the Clean Water Act?

The task force’s action plan is hindered by a lack of enforceable limits on nitrogen and phosphorus, according to the Tulane Institute on Water Resources Law and Policy. Instead, it focuses on voluntary state efforts and guidelines. 

In a presentation to the Louisiana Governor’s Advisory Commission on Coastal Restoration, Protection and Conservation in early June, Daigle said the state has been a passive and largely silent member of the task force. 

Daigle said the 176-page strategy is not technically a strategy because it doesn’t have any targets or goals. He added that the state has missed years of opportunity to reduce the dead zone.

To address the sheer quantity of nutrient pollution from the upriver basin states, Tulane lawyers suggest that Louisiana could petition the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for greater enforcement under the Clean Water Act.

One section of the law allows for the government to set specific, maximum amounts of daily pollutants for bodies of water deemed to be impaired. Louisiana could petition the EPA to declare sections of the Mississippi River or the Gulf of Mexico as impaired, which would allow for the creation of an enforceable limit on nutrients entering the river upstream. 

Louisiana could also petition the EPA administrator to convene an interstate water management conference to address pollution upriver. While the Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Task Force currently acts as a mediary between states, it lacks the enforcement power that the Clean Water Act could provide.

But the state has so far not done any of this. Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry’s office did not respond when asked if Landry has any plans to petition the EPA or address the growth of the dead zone. 

In 2016, the Gulf Restoration Network sued then-EPA administrator Lisa P. Jackson for the agency’s “hands-off approach” to dealing with nitrogen and phosphorus pollution under the Clean Water Act. This lawsuit followed a petition submitted by several environmental nonprofits in 2008 that demanded numeric water quality standards be set for the nutrients. 

But ultimately, the Eastern District of Louisiana court ruled that the EPA could continue a voluntary approach to nutrient reduction.

In 2019, when the most recent version of Louisiana’s nutrient reduction and management strategy was released, Mark Davis, director of the Tulane Institute on Water Resources Law and Policy, submitted recommendations for improvements to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ). 

Davis wrote that it has become clear that neither the EPA nor the task force would be implementing numeric targets any time soon. Those specific, enforceable limits would not be forthcoming “until Louisiana makes their development a priority and focuses the issue on upstream states and the federal government,” he wrote. 

“They did not make a dent,” Davis said.

‘The solution to pollution is not distribution’

As Louisiana works to review its Nutrient Reduction and Management Strategy, some critics say that the state focuses too heavily on plans to redirect the flow of the Mississippi River. 

The Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority (CPRA) highlights the benefits that would come from plans to reconnect the river to land across the coast.

“CPRA is constructing diversions with the main purpose of building and sustaining Louisiana’s coastal wetlands,” said Angelina Freeman, a research scientist at CPRA who was a member of the Louisiana Nutrient Reduction and Management Strategy interagency team. 

She explains that by redirecting the river’s flow, nutrients that would have otherwise fueled the dead zone would instead nourish the state’s recovering wetlands. 

A few man-made diversions are already up and running, such as the Caernarvon and Davis Pond Diversions. Davis Pond is restoring wetlands in the upper Barataria Basin on the west side of the Mississippi River near Luling, in St. Charles Parish, Louisiana, while Caernarvon delivers sediments and nutrients to Breton Sound on the river’s east bank in Plaquemines Parish.

The 2023 Louisiana Coastal Master Plan calls for redirecting sediments and nutrients into Barataria Bay on a massive scale through the largest single restoration project in U.S. history. The Mid-Barataria Sediment Diversion would build and nourish up to 27 square miles of coastal wetlands over the next 50 years.

But to Daigle, centering the state’s nutrient reduction and management strategy around sediment diversions such as the yet-to-be-built Mid-Barataria is a mistake. 

“Until (the diversions) are built and operating, they don’t do anything, good or bad,” he added. “Talking about them doesn’t accomplish anything. Having them in a plan doesn’t accomplish anything.”

“The solution to pollution is not distribution,” said Nancy Rabalais, a professor at Louisiana State University who, for years, led Gulf research cruises to monitor the size of the dead zone.

Rabalais and fellow LSU researcher R. Eugene Turner published a separate June 2024 dead zone forecast that was less dire than the above-average estimate released by NOAA. Their prediction looks at the potential effects of warmer water on oxygen levels. 

They emphasize that their reduced forecast is “solely due to ocean warming, not to a decline in nitrate loading from the Mississippi River.”

Cutting down on nutrients within Louisiana

While the vast majority of nutrients that create the dead zone every summer come from agriculture in the states upriver from Louisiana, there is still a significant input of runoff from farmland within the state itself.

In 2022, the LDEQ published a report on long-term nitrogen and phosphorus trends at ambient water quality monitoring stations across the state. They found that nutrient concentrations are decreasing at the majority of testing locations. 

Following these trends, Louisiana received a recent influx of funding to further reduce nutrient runoff within the state from the Gulf of Mexico Division of the EPA. 

Earlier this year, the Gulf of Mexico Alliance received a grant to help farmers in northeast Louisiana adopt practices to prevent excessive runoff from entering the Bayou Lafourche watershed, and ultimately the Red River and Atchafalaya Basin.

The Atchafalaya River siphons off 30% of the Mississippi River’s flow. The Atchafalaya has a growing delta system, such as at the Wax Lake Outlet, but excess nutrients still escape to the Gulf of Mexico, expanding the dead zone to the west. 

In Morehouse Parish, farmers are being taught how to limit their contribution to nutrient runoff that would reach the gulf through the Mississippi-Atchafalaya Basin. The grant will fund new farming techniques, including the subsidizing of cover crops to reduce runoff, which may also increase soil productivity and cash crop yields. 

“We’re doing exactly what we hope and wish everyone north of us would be doing,” said Joey Breaux, assistant commissioner of the Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry. He added that the farmers in Morehouse Parish have been very receptive to the new program. 

The $1.4 million grant will run through 2026 with the specific goal of reducing the Gulf of Mexico’s dead zone.

The funds will go to help farmers plant cover crops in between growing seasons to reduce soil erosion and prevent nutrients from running off into the river. The farmers will also receive instruction in no-till management, which calls for crops to be planted in narrow rows within the untilled seedbeds of previous crops. Keeping the soil intact increases organic matter and productivity while reducing the need for excess fertilizer.

Olander, the shrimper, said that he wishes the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries would support his industry’s losses in the way that they are for farmers. “They are really keeping their farmers going,” he added. “Call me a farmer of the sea; I’ll take that title if they would help us.”

What to expect from the next dead zone tour

On July 21, the R/V Pelican will set sail to take stock of this summer’s dead zone. NOAA will fund a six-day tour of the traditional hypoxic area to the west of the Mississippi River, where the Atchafalaya River also dumps nutrient runoff into the Gulf of Mexico.

This year, the cruise will be extended for four extra days to tour the area east of the Mississippi River. This portion of the cruise will be funded by a grant distributed by the Gulf of Mexico Alliance from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill. 

And that tour may bring new scientific research to be considered before Louisiana issues its five-year update to the state nutrient reduction strategy. 

“This strategy is up for revision,” said Daigle. “I think it needs a total revision, not just tweaking.”

This story is part of the series Farm to Trouble from the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, an editorially independent reporting network based at the University of Missouri School of Journalism in partnership with Report For America and funded by the Walton Family Foundation. Wisconsin Watch is a member of the network. Sign up for our newsletter to get our news straight to your inbox.

At the mouth of the Mississippi, Louisiana bears the burden of upstream runoff. Why doesn’t it push for solutions? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.