Jackson-Greely Farm Inc. vs. US

Case 1:18-cv-01141-EDK Document 1 Filed 08/03/18 Page 1 of 55
Receipt number 9998-4831776
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
Jackson-Greenly Farm, Inc.; Oehler Farm

Inc.; James Taflinger Trust; Benchmark
Farms, Inc.; Laurie Caldwell Revocable Trust
and Caldwell Farms, LLC; Lois M. Farris
Family Trust; William L. Glass dba Sister
Island Partners, Inc.; Travis Honey; Patricia 18-1141 L
No.___________________________
Honey; Travis Honey Holdings, LLC;
D and H Farms, Inc.; Horseshoe Bar & Grill,
LLC; Kenneth S. Pecord and Sherry Pecord;
John P. Maginel and Paige H.Maginel Joint
Revocable Trust and John P. Maginel and
Paige H. Maginel; Henry M. Renaud and
Dorothy J. Renaud; Adam L. Thomas; Walter
Grace Farms, LLC; Bonnie S. Willis; Carl
Willis and Sons, Inc.; David C. Willis; Lynn
Willis: Linda Dillman; JAJ Family, LLC;
Bass Ventures, LLC; Joan Wilkerson; Donald
R. Billings Revocable Trust,
Plaintiffs,
v.
THE UNITED STATES,
Defendant.
COMPLAINT
NATURE OF THE CLAIM
1. Plaintiffs bring their claims for a taking of their land and other property without
just compensation, by means of the construction of river training structures by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (“the Corps” or “Corps”). Accelerating their decades-old overly invasive
approach to managing the Mississippi River, the Corps constructed dikes, wing dikes, chevron
dikes, and bendway weirs in the Middle Mississippi River and Tributaries (collectively the
“Rivers”).
1
2. Specifically, to maintain a navigable river channel in the Rivers and minimize
dredging costs, the Corps constructed river training structures, including wing dikes, chevron
dikes, bendway weirs, vanes, and other dike varieties (“the Structures” or “Structures”) in the
Rivers knowing that the direct, natural, probable and foreseeable result would be to increase the
average Water Surface Elevations (WSEs) of the Rivers and alter the natural flow of the Rivers.
3. The most common measure of WSEs is the “stage,” i.e. WSEs relative to a local
datum. Stage is measured by local gage stations along the Rivers.
4. As a result of increased WSEs, Plaintiffs’ property has become inundated more
frequently, at higher elevations, for longer durations, and at unusual times of year (collectively,
“atypical flooding”).
5. The atypical flooding has caused some of Plaintiffs’ land to be severely eroded,
has inundated Plaintiffs’ property at elevations above the natural flood plain, has altered the
water table, and has left debris on Plaintiffs’ property.
6. The Structures also constrict the channel in certain areas, thereby altering the
natural flow of the river, which can direct damaging high-velocity flow.
7. The Structures and associated increased WSEs and altered course of the river
caused the Len Small Levee near Miller City, Illinois, to fail.
8. The Corps has been reshaping the Mississippi, Ohio, and other Midwestern rivers
to facilitate navigation for the past 150 years. Today, the Middle Mississippi River contains, on
average, over 6,000 feet of dikes per mile of river channel. Portions of the Rivers discussed
herein include the greatest densities of dike structures, both in number and length, in the world.
2
9. The Corps constructed levees on the banks of the Mississippi River in most of
Missouri, Illinois, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Mississippi to prevent flood inundation and to
narrow the flood plain.
10. Specifically, the Corps constructed levees along the banks of the Rivers in the
State of Missouri, but did not construct levees on the adjacent banks in Alexander County,
Illinois, when the Corps knew, or should have known, that the direct, natural, probable and
foreseeable result of the Structures would be to increase the average WSEs and cause atypical
flooding events.
11. The Corps foresaw that its river management practices would result in a severe
invasion of Plaintiffs’ property, appropriating Plaintiffs’ rights therein, by effectively imposing
flowage easements on Plaintiffs’ property.
12. Under the 1927 Rivers and Harbors Act, Congress established specific limits on
how many feet the Corps can constrict the Mississippi River channel. Specifically, channel
constriction through regulating works and revetment is limited to a conservative width of 2,500
to 2,000 feet at low water: 2,250 foot contraction from River des Peres to Grays Point; 2,500
foot contraction from Commerce to Commercial Point; and 2,000 foot contraction from
Commercial Point to Ohio River.
13. The Corps has aggressively contracted the Mississippi River channel far beyond
the mandated minimum widths without obtaining Congressional authorization.
14. As a direct, natural, probable and foreseeable result of the Corps’ Structures,
Plaintiffs’ lands have been subjected to atypical flooding events, which caused the Len Small
Levee to fail. These floods have substantially impacted and destroyed Plaintiffs’ land and
3
property, depriving them of its use and enjoyment for extended periods of time and, in some
cases, permanently. All of Plaintiffs’ lands are subject to atypical flooding,
15. For example, United States Geological Survey (“USGS”) tables suggest that in 5
of the past 20 years most of Plaintiffs’ properties have experienced at least a “10-year flood”; in
other words, a flood that historically has a 10% chance of occurring in a given year.
16. But for the Corps’ Structures and river management practices, all flooding would
have been smaller in magnitude and damage, the Len Small Levee would not have failed, and
these atypical flood events would not have occurred. To the extent that natural seasonal flooding
would have occurred in the absence of the Corps’ Structures, it has been severely altered and
aggravated by the Structures.
17. The Corps knew or should have known that continued construction of the
Structures would result in frequent overflow of the Rivers and devaluation of Plaintiffs’ private
property, sacrificing Plaintiffs’ land and other property for the public purpose of improving
navigation.
18. The atypical flooding and associated levee breach caused by the Corps’ Structures
and river management practices imposed a severe burden on Plaintiffs’ land and other property,
profoundly disrupting and interfering with Plaintiffs’ reasonable, investment-backed
expectations regarding the intended and customary use of that land and other property.
19. Historically, the federal government had expressly encouraged and incentivized
farming and economic development along the Rivers. Plaintiffs reasonably relied on the Corps’
authority and experience in managing the Rivers, and collectively invested billions of dollars and
tremendous efforts to maintain their land and other property for its intended and customary use.
4
20. Worse yet, in response to mounting evidence demonstrating that its Structures and
river management practices have increased flood levels and frequencies, the St. Louis District of
the Corps (“St. Louis Corps”) has hidden and manipulated original river data. These data
manipulations effectively mask increases in flood magnitudes and frequencies; increases driven
primarily by the Corps own construction of river training Structures.
21. The Corps has not obtained flowage easements, through contract or inverse
condemnation, nor has the Corps offered Plaintiffs just compensation for the benefit that it has
appropriated for public use.
22. The Corps’ practices have sacrificed Plaintiffs’ land and other property, without
compensation, for the public benefit.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
23. This Complaint states causes of action for taking of property and flowage
easements without just compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment to the United States
Constitution. The Court has jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1491(a).
24. Venue is proper in the United States Court of Federal Claims pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1491(a).
PARTIES
25. The Plaintiffs are farmers who own and/or operate farms in Alexander County,
Illinois; individuals who reside and/or operate businesses in Alexander County, Illinois; or
individuals, corporations, partnerships, trusts or other legal entities that own and/or operate
businesses in Alexander County, Illinois.
26. The Plaintiffs were farmers who own and/or operate farms in Alexander County,
Illinois; individuals who reside and/or operate businesses in Alexander County, Illinois; or
5
individuals, corporations, partnerships, trusts or other legal entities that own and/or operate
businesses in Alexander County, Illinois.
27. Plaintiff, Jackson – Greenly Farm, Inc., was deprived of the use and enjoyment of
its land in Alexander County, Illinois, due to a taking by recurrent flooding from breaches in the
Len Small levee and other atypical flooding events.
28. Plaintiff, Oehler Farm, Inc., was deprived of the use and enjoyment of its land in
Alexander County, Illinois, due to a taking by recurrent flooding from breaches in the Len Small
levee and other atypical flooding events.
29. Plaintiff, James Taflinger Trust, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of its land
in Alexander County, Illinois, due to a taking by recurrent flooding from breaches in the Len
Small levee and other atypical flooding events.
30. Plaintiff, Benchmark Farms, Inc., was deprived of the use and enjoyment of its
land in Alexander County, Illinois, due to a taking by recurrent flooding from breaches in the
31. Plaintiffs, Laurie Caldwell Revocable Trust and Caldwell Farms, LLC , was
deprived of the use and enjoyment of their land in Alexander County, Illinois, due to a taking by
recurrent flooding from breaches in the Len Small levee and other atypical flooding events.
32. Plaintiff, Lois M. Farris Family Trust, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of
33. Plaintiff, William L. Glass dba Sister Island Partners, Inc., was deprived of the
use and enjoyment of his land in Alexander County, Illinois, due to a taking by recurrent
flooding from breaches in the Len Small levee and other atypical flooding events.
6
34. Plaintiff, Travis Honey, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of his land in
35. Plaintiff, Patricia Honey, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of her land in
36. Plaintiff, Travis Honey Holdings, LLC, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of
37. Plaintiff, D & H Farms, Inc., was deprived of the use and enjoyment of its land in
38. Plaintiff, Horseshoe Bar & Grill, LLC, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of
39. Plaintiffs, Kenneth S. Pecord and Sherry Pecord, was deprived of the use and
enjoyment of their land in Alexander County, Illinois, due to a taking by recurrent flooding from
breaches in the Len Small levee and other atypical flooding events.
40. Plaintiffs, John P. Maginel and Paige H. Maginel Joint Revocable Trust and John
P. Maginel and Paige H. Maginel, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of their land in
7
41. Plaintiffs, Henry M. Renaud and Dorothy J. Renaud, was deprived of the use and
enjoyment of its land in Alexander County, Illinois, due to a taking by recurrent flooding from
breaches in the Len Small levee and other atypical flooding events.
42. Plaintiff, Adam L. Thomas, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of his land in
43. Plaintiff, Walter Grace Farms, LLC, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of its
44. Plaintiff, Bonnie S. Willis, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of her land in
45. Plaintiff, Carl Willis and Sons, Inc., was deprived of the use and enjoyment of its
46. Plaintiff, David C. Willis, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of his land in
47. Plaintiff, Lynn Willis, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of her land in
8
48. Plaintiff, Linda Dillman, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of her land in
49. Plaintiff, JAJ Family, LLC, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of its land in
50. Plaintiff, Bass Ventures, LLC, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of its land
in Alexander County, Illinois, due to a taking by recurrent flooding from breaches in the Len
Small levee and other atypical flooding events.
51. Plaintiff, Joan Wilkerson, was deprived of the use and enjoyment of her land in
52. Plaintiff, Donald R. Billings Revocable Trust, was deprived of the use and
enjoyment of its land in Alexander County, Illinois, due to a taking by recurrent flooding from
the breaches in the Len Small levee and other atypical flooding events.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
53. Until the early Twentieth Century, individuals navigating the Mississippi River
and its Tributaries could only do so in shallow draft vessels. Further, navigation was often only
available seasonally, limiting the utility of the Rivers for transport.
54. As transport and shipping needs increased, Congress determined that improving
river navigability through engineering works on and around the Rivers was in the national
interest.
9
55. In 1906 the Corps Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors (the “Board”)
completed its investigation of the proposed Ohio River Canalization Project, recommending the
establishment of a nine-foot navigation channel on the Ohio River from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
to Cairo, Illinois. The Board planned to deepen the navigation channel by constructing 54 lock-
and-dam structures (three of which were later eliminated through modification of other projects),
consisting of movable (“wicket”) dams, each constructed alongside a 110- by 600-foot lock
chamber. Congress authorized construction, following the Board’s recommendation, in the
Rivers and Harbors Act of June 25, 1910. From 1910 to 1922, most work on the Ohio River
occurred upstream of Louisville, but beginning in 1922, the slogan of the Ohio Valley
Improvement Association was “On to Cairo by 1929”; this despite that commercial navigation
on the Ohio had by then "practically come to a halt.” As Col. Roberts of the Corps identified in
1923, “the Ohio is, to a considerable extent, only a playground for owners of small locally
owned boats.” Nonetheless, the Corps completed the nine-foot Ohio River project on August 27,
1929.
56. As to the Mississippi River, the Corps understood that it was necessary to manage
the flow and geometry of the Rivers in a manner that would promote navigation and create a
narrow and deep channel.
57. In turn, Congress passed the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1927 (“1927 Act”), which
authorized certain works, including some constriction of the Mississippi River channel.
58. To constrict the channel, for the purpose of enhancing navigation, the Corps
constructed thousands of river training structures in the Rivers, literally converting these rivers
into man-made constructs. Through this history, the primary authorized purpose and the primary
10
management priority guiding Corps actions on the Rivers was navigation. The Corps carried out
that priority objective through an expanding toolkit of river training structures.
59. The Corps’ engineering Structures have achieved their intended purpose, i.e. to
create, and later facilitate, navigation on the Mississippi River. However, the continued
construction of these Structures has yielded foreseeable adverse consequences for Plaintiffs.
THE EXPANDING CORPS TOOLKIT
Wing Dike
60. As discussed above, since the Nineteenth Century, the Corps has manipulated the
Mississippi River and Ohio River channels with the primary goal of facilitating navigation. The
Corps predominately carries out that objective on the Middle Mississippi River and upper Lower
Mississippi River by constructing river training Structures to constrict the channel.
61. The purpose of river training Structures is to constrict the river channel,
concentrate flow, redirect sediment, and deepen and maintain the navigable portion of the
channel.
62. For all purposes, the Structures block and alter portions of the River’s flow area.
The laws of physics and hydraulics dictate that for a series of river training Structures, blocking
the flow areas results in increased flow velocity in the navigable portion of the channel as well as
increased WSEs.
63. Directed flow from upstream wing-dikes can cause extreme stress levels in flood
conditions.
64. Through the Nineteenth and Twentieth Century, the primary tool to establish,
deepen, and maintain the navigation channel of the Mississippi River was a Structure known as
the “wing dike.” Constructed from wooden pilings and/or rock, wing dikes run from the river
11
banks for hundreds or thousands of feet into the channel for the purpose of redirecting flow and
sediment.
65. Below is a true and accurate photograph of wing dikes in the river:
66. As of 1990, the Middle Mississippi River contained 646 wing dikes or wing-dike
segments, with a cumulative length of 378,982 feet.
67. The 1927 Act authorized establishment of a navigable channel on the Middle
Mississippi River 300 feet wide and at least nine feet deep from the mouth of the Ohio River
upstream to the northern boundary of St. Louis, Missouri.
68. For decades, academic research had linked construction of wing dikes with
increased flood levels. Peer-reviewed publications have linked wing dikes and bendway weirs to
large decreases in flood conveyance and increases in flood levels on the Mississippi River and its
tributaries.
12
69. Flood peaks, i.e. the highest value of stage for a particular gage, of the Mississippi
River were 0.61 meters higher in 1973 than in 1844, but discharge was approximately 35% less
than the estimated flow for 1844.
70. The 1908 Mississippi River flood had the same flow as the 1973 Mississippi
River flood, but the flood peak was 2.51 meters lower in 1908.
71. As long as continuous records have been kept, flood stages at constant discharge
have increased steadily on the Missouri River and certain stretches of the Mississippi River
where Structures are prevalent. These increases directly correlate with the Corps’ continuing
efforts to manage the Rivers.
72. Present-day floods on the Middle Mississippi River at St. Louis tend to be nine
feet higher than historic floods at 780,000 cubic feet per second (“cfs”).
73. In addition to academic studies, decades of the Corps’ own research have
associated both losses of channel conveyance and increases in flood levels on portions of the
Mississippi River and its tributaries with extensive dike construction.
74. In 1896 the Corps linked its first systemwide wing-dam construction to reduced
bank full channel capacity on the Missouri River.
75. Corps’ reports at the turn of the Twentieth century recognized that intensive
channelization of the Missouri River resulted in losses in bank full capacity of up to 18%.
Further, the Corps acknowledge that although low flows within the channel are being conveyed
at progressively lower stages, flood flows are now significantly higher than prior to regulation of
the River.
76. At the “navigation channel” sites along the Missouri River, WSEs fell for low
discharges but rose for flood discharges, with some stations rising for all conditions. In a 1998
13
technical report, the Corps observed, “[t]he upward trend is most apparent at Nebraska City[,
Missouri] and St. Joseph[, Missouri], where flows of 80,000 to 90,000 cfs now go overbank
compared to bank full discharges of around 150,000 cfs about 30 years ago.”
77. In contrast, the Corps’ present position is that river training Structures do not have
an effect on flood heights.
Bendway Weir
78. Since approximately 1940, the geometry of the Middle Mississippi River channel
has been sufficient to facilitate navigation, supported by ongoing maintenance (primarily the
dredging of sediment from the navigation channel). “[R]egulation works on the middle
Mississippi were 57% complete by 1930,” and “St. Louis had by 1940 completed its role in
creating a nine-foot channel on the upper Mississippi.”
79. With navigability in hand, the Corps no longer needed to invest in establishing the
navigation channel. The Corps’ subsequent construction of Structures is oriented primarily
toward reducing dredging expenses. Dredging is the single greatest cost item in the Corps’ civil
works budget. On the Upper Mississippi River, dredging for the nine-foot navigation channel is
initiated when depths less than 0.5 feet are observed in the channel; and dredging generally is
conducted to depths from 11–13 feet.
80. Beginning in approximately 1990, the Corps embarked on a renewed and
aggressive campaign to further control the Middle Mississippi River and upper Lower
Mississippi River. To do so, the Corps developed and utilized a new and expanding toolkit of
Structures.
81. In the 1980s, the Corps invented a new type of aggressive Structure, the bendway
weir. According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, “[t]otally submerged stone weirs
14
along the outside of a river bend are a new concept of river training developed by the US Army
Corps of Engineers.”
82. Starting approximately 1990, the Corps began constructing bendway weirs in
large numbers along the Middle Mississippi River.
83. Between 1990 and 1993 alone, the Corps constructed roughly 40,000 linear feet
of dikes and bendway weirs on the Middle Mississippi River.
84. As of 2012, at least 831 dikes or dike segments have been constructed on the
Middle Mississippi River, with a cumulative length of at least 472,093 linear feet.
85. The Corps asserted that bendway weirs better redirect the flow of the river to
shape the navigation channel and reduce dredging costs. According to the Corps, bendway weirs
“extend directly into the navigation channel underneath passing tows. Their unique position and
alignment alter the river’s spiraling, secondary currents in a manner which shifts the currents
away from the outside bankline . . . [t]his results in a wider and safer navigation channel through
the bend without the need for periodic maintenance dredging.”
86. In addition, and despite any purported benefits to navigability and maintenance
costs, bend-way weirs substantially increase WSEs and flooding.
87. Comparative analysis of the impacts of wing dikes and bendway weirs upon flood
levels demonstrates that bend-way weirs have many times the flood impact of wing dikes.
Chevron Dike
88. In the late 1990s, the Corps invented the chevron dike, an arch-shaped dike
structure placed within the channel. It soon began constructing chevron dikes in large numbers
along the Middle Mississippi River.
15
89. The Corps asserted that the chevron dike better alters sediment flow to improve
navigability and reduce maintenance costs vis-à-vis wing dikes. According to the Corps, “[t]he
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) recently constructed a set of innovative river training
structures in the Upper Mississippi River to remedy a repetitive maintenance dredging problem.”
90. Beyond increasing WSEs, Chevrons can move velocities in toward the outside
river bank and threaten bank stability.
91. Below is a true and accurate photograph of chevon dikes in the river:
92. At present, the Corps has built at least 23 chevron dikes in the Middle Mississippi
River, often accompanying new wing dikes and other dikes constructed nearby.
93. In addition to the bendway weirs and chevron dikes, the Corps continues to invent
new training Structures and build them in the Rivers.
94. New dike structures to date include so-called “S-dikes,” “W-dikes,” and more.
The Corps has built and continues to build new dike inventions on the Rivers without prior
knowledge of their impacts on real-world rivers.
16
95. In 2017, the Corps recommended to Congress that they proceed with a 15-year
construction plan to bolster more than 1,375 Structures along the Rivers.
FORSEEABILITY
The Corps Knew or Should Have Known the Continued Construction of Structures Would
Increase the Severity of Floods
Hydraulic Testing
96. There are three primary means of testing Structures to predict their potential
impact.
97. The Corps currently designs and tests new dike types and dike projects using
tabletop sandbox “micro-models,” the least effective testing mechanism of the three available
approaches.
98. The first method of testing the impacts of Structures is physical modeling,
meaning an experimental model typically conducted using actual flowing water and sand in a
scaled-down environment such as a flume. In physical modeling, the proposed Structure or other
project features are constructed at a reduced scale, and water is poured through the model to
predict the potential impacts on flow patterns, sedimentation, and potentially on flood levels.
Physical models can be built at a variety of scales, from tens of feet to hundreds of feet in length.
99. The Corps developed its own method of physical modeling using an extremely
small-scale model built on a tabletop, sometimes known as a “micro-model.”
100. “Micro-modeling” of river impacts has been criticized by academic researchers
and even by some Corps engineers, and has been referred to as “a sandbox and a garden hose.”
101. The second method of testing the impacts of Structures is through computer-based
hydraulic modeling. In this approach, the river system is simulated digitally using the principles
of hydraulics and specialty software in either one-, two-, or three-dimensions. Like physical
17
models, computer models can be used to estimate the impacts of new Structures before such
Structures are built. Both physical and computer modeling yield only best-guess estimates of
real-world impacts, because they require the use of certain assumptions and uncertainties.
102. The third method of testing the impacts of river training structures is known as
empirical analysis. Unlike physical and computer modeling, empirical analysis gathers real-
world river measurements in the years after construction to document the actual impacts of
Structures. In particular, the Corps and the United States Geological Survey (“USGS”)
periodically measure river flow volumes and WSEs at numerous measurement stations on the
Rivers. Using statistics and other techniques, it is possible to precisely compare river conditions
before and after construction.
103. Below is a true and accurate photograph of the St. Louis District of the Corps
micro-model taken from the Corps’ website:
104. Regarding its practice of physical tabletop modeling, the Corps’ admits that
“some people within USACE question the veracity of micro-models, and some people outside
USACE have severely criticized micromodels,” concluding that micro-modeling “shows a lack
of predictive capability" and that "the micromodel should be limited to demonstration, education,
and communication.”
18
105. Further, tabletop micro-modeling is incapable of testing dike impacts on flood
levels. Maynord (2006) notes that there is “no correspondence of stage in model and prototype,”
meaning no relationship between WSEs in the micro-model verses WSEs in the real world.
Even the inventors of the St. Louis District micro-model, Robert Davinroy and his colleagues,
acknowledge that “flow and stages are not directly scalable.” In fact, as implemented by the St.
Louis District, the tabletop micro-model cannot even be operated in flood conditions because
“[m]aximum stages in the micro-model are about 2/3 of bank full.”
106. Nonetheless, despite this guidance and available modeling alternatives, the Corps
has designed, and continues to design, its Structures primarily using in-house physical micro-
modeling.
107. Below is a true and accurate photograph of the St. Louis District of the Corps
micro-model:
19
108. Despite voluminous academic and Corps research suggesting that Structures are
likely to cause flood-level increase, the Corps continues to build at a rapid rate.
109. Despite superior modeling alternatives in widespread use within the private
sector, the federal government, and even the Corps itself, the Corps continues to deploy river
training Structures after only conducting physical micro-model tests.
Flooding Consensus
110. Other federal agencies and the academic community have recognized that
cumulatively, river training Structures are causing extreme flooding events.
111. The Corps has acknowledged that the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(“USFW”) “states that channel training structures have also altered the natural hydrograph of the
Middle Mississippi River by contributing to higher WSE at lower discharges than in the past and
to a downward trend in annual minimum stages.”
112. The flooding consequences associated with the Corps construction and
management practices have not been lost on the academic communities and non-governmental
organizations, nor on the press and the public. Specifically, there has been widespread and well
documented public opposition to additional dike construction on the Rivers.
113. The Corps held a public hearing in Wolf Lake, Illinois in February of 2014. The
hearing was intended to engage with stakeholders, as required by the National Environmental
Policy Act, regarding the Corps’ Grand Tower Phase 5 project, one of several recent local dike
construction projects along the Middle Mississippi River. The hearing was crowded with
teachers, students, levee board members, local leaders, scientists, environmentalists and
numerous floodplain residents. The overwhelming consensus was in opposition to the
construction of new Structures through the project. Minutes after the meeting, the district staff
20
told local media that they will move forward with the projects regardless of public input. Indeed,
the district announced shortly thereafter that it would proceed with dike construction as planned.
114. The Editorial Board of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, along with numerous other
press groups and outlets nationwide, have repeatedly exhorted the Corps, and the St. Louis
District in particular, to come to grips with the impacts of its river construction program on
flooding.
115. Moreover, dozens of peer-reviewed academic publications agree that
cumulatively, river training Structures have magnified flooding along the Middle Mississippi
River.
116. Nonetheless, the Corps has uniformly dismissed and disregarded all expressions
of concern and opposition by the public and other federal agencies alike.
THE FLOODS AND LEVEE BREACHES
As Foreseen, the Corps’ Continued Engineering of the River Has Led to Recurrent and
Atypical Flooding Causing Severe and Unprecedented Losses
Something amiss
117. Periodic seasonal flooding of the Rivers onto adjacent floodplain land is a natural
phenomenon, recorded for centuries and observed for millennia.
118. Nonetheless, by every measure, magnitude, frequency, and duration of flooding
along the Middle Mississippi River has dramatically increased in recent years.
119. Following the Mississippi River Flood of 1973—at the time the flood of record
along the Middle Mississippi River—and subsequent flooding events in the 1970s, several
scientific papers discussed the potential causes of increased flood stages.
21
120. The ratings curve for the Middle Mississippi River shifted dramatically over the
early part of the century, resulting in higher flood stages for equal volumes of flow. This shift in
flood stages correlated with the continued construction of Structures by the Corps.
121. In response to these findings, the Corps and others asserted that early discharge
data on the Mississippi River and elsewhere cannot be compared with recent data because early
measurements purportedly did not rely exclusively upon the Price current meter determinations
of flow velocity as did later measurements made by the USGS.
122. In order to verify its belief, the Corps commissioned the University of Missouri
Rolla to evaluate historical methods of discharge measurement, investigating the accuracy of
River measurement techniques and the need for any adjustments to historical discharge data.
123. The result was the Stevens Report (1979), which concluded that “an experienced
person using accepted techniques, can obtain excellent discharge determinations using any of the
velocity measuring vehicles” and specifically that their results “do no substantiate correction of
all recorded past discharge that have been determined using floats.”
124. Nonetheless, the Corps manipulated the historic discharge readings, and these
false discharges are being used as the basis for official applications along the Middle Mississippi
River, including new flood frequencies and flood-hazard maps.
125. These discharge manipulations effectively concealed the true driver of increases
in flood magnitudes and frequencies; which as discussed below, are driven primarily by the
Corps own construction of river training Structures.
22
The Middle Mississippi River: A History of Engineering Floods
St. Louis, Missouri
126. As mentioned above, the Middle Mississippi River runs from the mouth of the
Missouri River at St. Louis, Missouri, to the Ohio River at Cairo, Illinois.
127. This portion of the Mississippi River is the most engineered section of any river in
the world.
128. The Middle Mississippi River has been subject to ongoing engineering up to
present day, with new Structures constructed yearly.
129. The Middle Mississippi River at St. Louis, Missouri, has experienced an
anomalous amount of peak WSEs in recent years. There has also been an increase in the
duration and recurrence of inundation on adjacent lands.
23
130. Below is a true and accurate graph showing a sharp increase in the feet above
flood stage, and frequency of floods, over time at St. Louis, Missouri, coinciding with the Corps’
continued navigational engineering of the Middle Mississippi River:
24
131. Below is a true and accurate hydrograph of the Mississippi River at St. Louis,
Missouri, from February 2013, through October 2013, showing the Mississippi River was at or
above flood stage of 30 feet for an abnormal duration and height:
25
132. Below is a true and accurate hydrograph of the Mississippi River at St. Louis,
Missouri from February 2017, through August 2017, showing the Mississippi River was at or
above flood stage of 30 feet for an abnormal duration and timing:
26
Thebes, Illinois
133. The Middle Mississippi at Thebes, Illinois, has also experienced an anomalous
amount of peak WSEs in recent years. There has also been an increase in the duration and
recurrence of inundation.
134. Below is a true and accurate hydrograph of the Mississippi River stages at
Thebes, Illinois, in 2002 showing the Mississippi River was at or above flood stage of 33 feet for
nearly two months:
27
135. Below is a true and accurate hydrograph of the Mississippi River at Thebes,
Illinois, from March 2015, through November 2015, showing the Mississippi River was at or
above flood stage of 33 feet for an abnormal duration and timing:
28
136. Below is a true and accurate hydrograph of the Mississippi River at Thebes,
Illinois, from October 2015, through April 2016, showing the Mississippi River was at or above
flood stage of 33 feet during an atypical winter flood:
137. The rapid rise in water levels in the winter of 2015 represented an extraordinary
and extremely atypical “flash flood” on the Middle Mississippi River near the Len Small Levee
in Miller City, Illinois.
138. This extraordinary “flashy response” of the Middle Mississippi River, due to the
Corps’ engineering, resembled that of a much smaller river.
Cairo, Illinois
139. Due to backwater effects, flooding on the extreme Lower Ohio River for many
miles upstream of the confluence at Cairo, Illinois, is largely controlled by water levels on the
Mississippi River and by the engineering modifications of the Mississippi River that have altered
flood stages.
29
140. The Ohio River at Cairo, Illinois, has experienced an anomalous amount of peak
WSEs in recent years. There has also been an increase in the duration and recurrence of
inundation.
141. Below is a true and accurate hydrograph of the Ohio River stages at Cairo, Illinois
from January 2011, through September 2011, showing the Ohio River was at or above flood
stage of 40 feet for an abnormal duration and record WSE peak:
142. Historically, the Ohio River at Cairo, Illinois, was at or above flood stage, on
average, 10.3% of days in a year.
143. In the past ten years, the Ohio River at Cairo, Illinois, was at or above flood stage,
on average, 16.4% of days in a year.
30
144. The increase in the duration of floods from the constriction of the river amounts to
some fields being inundated, on average, an additional three weeks per year over natural
conditions.
145. Below is a true and accurate graph showing the Ohio River at Cairo, Illinois, was
at or above flood stage, on average, 16.4% of days in a year since 2008:
146. The increase in the daily variations of WSEs at the Ohio River at Cairo, Illinois,
has progressively and dramatically increased with the construction of Structures.
147. This variability has caused changes to some Plaintiffs’ ground water tables and
the predictability of the River and has interfered with the drainage of some Plaintiffs’ property.
31
148. Below is a true and accurate graph depicting the progressive increase in the daily
variations of WSEs of the Ohio River at Cairo, Illinois:
149. Moreover, the mean local stage of the Rivers has been progressively increasing
with the construction of Structures.
32
150. Below is a true and accurate graph depicting the mean river stage on the Ohio
River at Cairo, Illinois, since approximately 1860:
Renewed Campaign
151. In 1990, against the behest of many, the Corps began a renewed and aggressive
campaign of Structure construction for the benefit of navigation.
152. The Corps built at least 40,000 feet of wing dikes and bendway weirs between
1990 and 1993 alone.
153. Between 2003 and 2010 the Corps built at least 23 chevron dikes in the Middle
Mississippi River.
154. As of 2012, at least 182 bendway weirs have been constructed on the Middle
Mississippi River, with a cumulative length of at least 119,865 linear feet.
155. The flooding effect of the Corps river engineering has been staggering.
33
156. Incredibly, eight of the top ten floods in the history of the Cape Girardeau and
Thebes gages—with records dating back to the 1800s—have occurred since 1993.
157. Six of the top ten floods in the history of both the Cape Girardeau and Thebes
gages have occurred since 2002.
158. Below is a true and accurate chart depicting the years of the top ten floods
measured by peak stage in the history of various gage stations:
159. This dramatic atypical flooding, caused by the Corps’ continued construction of
Structures, has led to devastating destruction of Plaintiffs’ land and other property.
34
160. Below is a true and accurate photograph of Miller City Road in Miller City,
Illinois, completely inundated by flood waters:
161. Plaintiffs’ property has incredibly experienced at least four 100-year floods in the
past 25 years.
162. Plaintiffs’ property has experienced seven 25-year floods in the past 25 years.
163. The Corps’ engineering of the Middle Mississippi River has caused atypical
flooding, thereby putting unnatural stress on private levees that were built to withstand historical
natural conditions.
164. The Corps’ engineering of the Middle Mississippi River has caused atypical
backwater and “seepage” in areas behind the Len Small Levee.
165. The Corps’ engineering and construction of Structures along the riverbed of the
Middle Mississippi River has also altered the natural flow of the river, directing flow toward the
Len Small Levee.
35
Len Small Levee
166. The Dogtooth Bend peninsula, as it is known in deep southern Illinois, has long
been highly productive agriculture land near the Middle Mississippi River.
167. As early as the fourteenth century the Middle Mississippi Indians built ceremonial
mounds and a village near the present-day town of Miller City, Illinois.
168. This suggests that humans have lived in this portion of present-day Alexander
County, Illinois, for over 700 years and that the area was seldom flooded.
169. Modern farming practices in this area began in the early 1800s, but have been
brought to almost a complete halt since 2016 due to the Corps’ actions.
170. Unlike most agriculture land along the Rivers, the Dogtooth Bend peninsula was
not protected by levees for most of its history.
171. Moreover, it is not reclaimed swamp-land granted through the Swampland Act of
1850 like much of the agriculture land along the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers.
172. In 1943, Illinois land-owners decided they needed to protect their farm land from
flood current diverted by the levees in Missouri that was causing erosion to their land.
173. A new farmer drainage district built a private sand core levee, now known as the
Len Small Levee, which was much lower than the mainline federal levees near the confluence of
the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers.
174. The downstream, southeastern portion of the Dogtooth Bend peninsula has never
been protected by a levee.
175. The Len Small Levee was never damaged by floodwaters until a renewed waive
of Structure construction near the levee caused it to fail in 1993.
36
176. Below is a true and accurate photograph showing the Len Small Levee failure of
1993 inundating thousands of acres of highly productive farmland:
177. The Len Small Levee was repaired by a joint effort between the local levee
district and the Corps after the 1993 failure.
178. The Len Small Levee failed again in 2011 after more Structures were constructed.
37
179. Below is a true and accurate photograph showing land scouring after the 2011
Len Small Levee failure:
38
180. Below is a true and accurate map showing the 1993, 2011, and 2016 Len Small
Levee failures and a few of the Structures near the breaches:
181. The Len Small levee was repaired after the 2011 failure by the local drainage
district with some assistance by the Corps.
182. On December 31, 2016, the Len Small Levee breached for the third time in its
long history during an atypical winter flood.
39
183. Below is a true an accurate satellite image showing two recently constructed
chevron dikes and other Structures near the 2016 Len Small Levee failure:
184. Below is a true and accurate photograph showing an irrigation pivot and highly
productive farmland buried under several feet of sand after the 2016 Len Small Levee failure:
40
185. Below is a true and accurate photograph showing the massive recurrent flooding
since the 2016 breach in the Len Small Levee:
186. Below is a true and accurate photograph showing many acres of highly productive
land still underwater in May 2018 after the January 2016 Len Small Levee breach:
41
187. Below is a true and accurate photograph showing Plaintiff Sean Pecord’s home,
now surrounded by a levee, along with highly productive farm land that has been permanently
inundated after the 2016 Len Small Levee failure:
188. Some of the riverbed near the Len Small Levee is made of bedrock, which
prevents wing-dikes and other structures from scouring the channel, exacerbating the flooding
effects of these Structures even more dramatically.
42
189. The Dogtooth Bend peninsula area of Alexander County, Illinois, has experienced
excessive and permanent damages including sand deposits, erosion, scouring, and severe
recurrent flooding.
190. Below is a true and accurate photograph of a house sitting behind temporary
levees in 2018:
191. The Corps have now refused to rebuild or offer aid on the rebuilding of the Len
Small Levee.
192. The Corps have refused to authorize any repairs of the Len Small Levee.
43
CAUSAL MECHANISMS
The Corps Continued Construction of Structures Is the Cause of Recent Atypical Flooding
Climate Change, Land-use Change, Levees
193. There is widespread academic and governmental consensus that in recent years
flooding on the Mississippi River has become more severe, more frequent, and larger in
magnitude.
194. Using objective measures of flooding, such as river stage, recent flooding has
been more frequent, intense, and longer in duration at many locations on the Rivers. These
increases are progressive, systematic, and statistically significant.
195. The full range of causal mechanisms that could magnify flooding can be separated
into two groups: (1) upstream factors, and (2) instream factors.
196. “Upstream factors” include potential climate change, basin land-cover change,
and any dams present upstream on the river or its tributaries. Climate-change researchers
suggest that a warming earth can lead to more intense storms which, in turn, could cause larger
floods on rivers including the Mississippi. Similarly, historic changes in land cover within the
watershed can alter the pattern of runoff from rainstorms, which could also cause larger floods.
Dams, such as those that have been built on the main-stem Missouri River, were designed in part
to store flood waters to reduce flooding downstream.
197. “Instream factors” include any alteration of the river channel or floodplain that
change how floodwaters are conveyed through a given stretch of river. For example, if
narrowing the river channel cuts the river’s cross-sectional area in half, flood waters will be
significantly deeper, all other factors being equal.
44
198. Scientists and engineers have evaluated the full range of mechanisms that could
potentially contribute to magnified flooding on the Mississippi River and Ohio River, and have
recently been able to specifically quantify and attribute increased flooding to certain such
mechanisms.
199. Below is a true and accurate graph depicting the attribution of certain upstream
and instream factors to stage changes at specific gage stations along the Middle Mississippi
River:
200. In the upper Mississippi watershed, both statistical analyses of flood trends, and
climate modeling studies, conclude that climate change is not making the largest floods larger.
After analyzing 774 gaging records from the Central United States (“CUS”), Mallakpur and
Villarini (2015) concluded that "the largest flood peaks have not been strongly increasing in this
broad belt of the CUS.”
45
201. On the Mississippi River, research has specifically assessed the combined impacts
of climate change and land-cover change (“upstream factors”) and found their effects on large
Mississippi River floods to be de minimis.
202. Likewise, research has specifically assessed the impact of dams on flooding on
the Mississippi River system and the impacts of mainstem dams on the Missouri River.
Although these dams significantly decrease flood peaks for a number of miles downstream,
tributary inputs diminish those benefits farther away. On the MMR, at least 800 miles
downstream from the nearest Missouri River dam, research has demonstrated that there is no
statistically significant reduction in peak floods.
203. Further, changes in upstream factors would increase “discharge,” i.e. river flow
rate measured in cubic feet per second. USGS discharge measurements stretching back several
decades (to over a century) show no statistically significant increase in discharge for flood peaks
measured at any of the stations on the Middle Mississippi River or upper Lower Mississippi
River.
204. With upstream factors effectively eliminated as the potential mechanisms driving
observed atypical flooding on the Rivers, instream factors are the only remaining impetus.
205. Historic instream changes to the Rivers, as outlined above, include the Structures
defined above, as well as levees and constriction of the river channel. Narrowing or constriction
of the Rivers has been a direct causal result of Structure building. Thus, both Structure
construction and constriction can be considered concurrently.
206. The hydraulic impact of levees has been extensively studied, including on the
Middle Mississippi River and upper Lower Mississippi River. Levees create a “surcharge” (i.e.
higher WSE) by excluding flood water from the flood plain and confining flood flows to the
46
river channel. Research on the Mississippi River system shows levee-driven increases in flood
levels of a few inches up to a small number of feet. This amount is substantially less than the
observed increases in high WSE levels on the Rivers and, as shown below, is de minimis
compared to the impact of river training structures.
Flood Impacts of River Training Structures
207. Because the majority of observed atypical flooding on the Mississippi River
cannot be attributed to other available factors, extensive research has considered the impact of
Structures.
208. Beside discharge, for individuals in flood prone areas, stage is the direct measure
of a flood’s impact on them. After all, if one’s property is inundated, the depth and duration of
the floodwaters is far more material than the flow rate of passing water.
209. In contrast to discharge measurements, long-term analysis of stage measurements
shows statistically significant increases in flooding and flood duration at measurement stations
along the Middle Mississippi River and upper Lower Mississippi River near the confluence.
210. Another line of research into flood impacts resulting from instream factors utilizes
“Specific Gage Analysis.” Specific Gage Analysis is a technique designed to reduce the “noise,”
or variability associated with short-term weather impacts on long-term hydrologic trends. This
technique is widely used, including by the Corps in its River studies. Specific Gage Analysis
tracks water elevations for fixed and specific discharges, thus significantly reducing variability
for any year of interest.
211. Specific Gage Analysis has been performed for measurement stations throughout
the Mississippi River. These analyses confirm large increases in WSE for flood conditions.
Moreover, these analyses show increases in WSE precisely where and when Structures have
47
been built. In other words, when and where Structures have been built historically is when and
where flood levels and WSEs have increased. When and where such Structures were not built or
stopped being built, flood levels and WSEs increased little or not at all.
212. In rivers where Structures have been removed or minimized, such as in the upper
Ohio River and the Rhine River, flood levels have significantly decreased, returning to historic
levels.
213. Statistical analysis of these specific gage trends shows that on the Middle
Mississippi River the construction of thousands of feet of wing dike and chevron dikes has
resulted in up to 15 feet of increased flood levels in some locations and six to ten feet in broad
stretches of the Middle Mississippi River and upper Lower Mississippi River where these
Structures are prevalent.
214. Very recent advances in palaeoflood hydrology have allowed scientists to
extensively study more than 500 years of flooding on the Middle Mississippi River to determine
the effects, if any, of climate change.
215. While there have been small, up-and-down changes in flood stage over time,
there have been unprecedented increases in stage given the same discharge that coincide with the
Corps’ continued navigation engineering of the Mississippi River.
48
216. Below is a true and accurate graph showing the effect of Structures on WSEs at
Thebes, Illinois:
217. In addition, hydraulic modeling has also been used to test the impacts of
Structures on the Mississippi River. Using archival river survey data, principally from the
Corps, historic digital models of the Mississippi River have been created for the past 100 years,
known as hydraulic retro-models (numerical hydraulic models of historical conditions). This
hydraulic retro-modeling simulates the impacts of various instream changes, including Structure
construction, in the resulting flooding.
218. As identified statistically, a small amount of the total observed increases in flood
magnitude throughout the history of the Middle Mississippi River and Lower Mississippi River
are due to levee construction, totaling three feet or less throughout the Middle Mississippi River
and extreme upper Lower Mississippi River.
219. The retro-modeling also shows small, insignificant, local increases in flood levels
attributed to greater bank vegetation over time. Nonetheless, the modeling shows that the clear
49
majority of total increases in flooding are directly attributable to the Corps’ construction of
Structures. Structures increased flood levels by up to 15 feet in some locations and 6 to 10 feet
in stretches of the Mississippi River where these Structures are prevalent.
220. By all the above measures, research indicates that the impacts of instream and
upstream factors are cumulative, meaning that each successive construction in the Rivers adds to
and exacerbates flooding on the Rivers
221. Over time sediment accumulates on or around the Structures, increasing the
Structures effect on WSEs.
222. Nonetheless, the Corps began a renewed wave of intensive dike construction in
1990, building 40,000 feet of wing dikes and bendway weirs between 1990 and 1993.
223. Between 2003 and 2010 the Corps built at least 23 chevron dikes.
224. That campaign continues to the present day, with a new plan to construct new
Structures and repair and lengthen existing structures.
THE CORPS’ CONSTRUCTION HAS INTERFERED WITH PLAINTIFFS’

REASONABLE INVESTMENT-BACKED EXPECTATIONS OF THEIR PROPERTY
225. The atypical flooding caused by the Corps’ recent construction practices has
imposed a severe burden on Plaintiffs’ land and other property, profoundly disrupting and
interfering with Plaintiffs’ reasonable expectations of the intended and customary use of that
property.
50
226. Below is a true and accurate photograph of the highly productive farmland of
Plaintiff, David Willis, that was ruined by deep sand deposits from the 2016 Len Small Levee
breach:
227. The Corps’ Structures have caused higher WSEs for longer durations, which has
blocked drainage and raised the groundwater table, significantly impairing the use of agriculture
and recreation property.
228. As a result of increased WSEs, the Len Small Levee breached causing destruction
never before seen.
229. As a result of the Len Small Levee breach, many Plaintiffs’ highly productive
farmland has been covered by several feet of sand, ruining any agriculture value.
51
230. Below is a true and accurate photograph showing several feet of sand covering
highly productive farmland in Alexander County, Illinois:
231. Furthermore, some Plaintiffs have lost crops, have not been able to farm, or can
no longer farm due to the atypical flooding.
232. Some Plaintiffs have not been able to access their property due to the atypical
flooding
233. Some Plaintiffs’ land has been severely eroded due to the atypical flooding.
234. Many Plaintiffs’ have lost their homes and other buildings because of the Corps’
actions.
235. Many Plaintiffs’ face insolvency or bankruptcy because of the Corps’ actions.
236. Plaintiffs have made significant investment of time and resources in the land and
other property now devastated by the Corps’ actions. Plaintiffs made these investments based on
the expectation that the Corps would manage the Rivers responsibly and on the long history of
farming and habitation in the area.
52
CAUSE OF ACTION
237. Cause 1: The Corps Took Plaintiffs’ Property without Just Compensation in
Violation of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution
238. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference and reallege as though fully set forth herein,
each and every allegation as set forth in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
239. Plaintiffs have a legally-recognized property interest in their land and other
property, and the economic benefits associated with that property, located in Alexander County,
Illinois.
240. Plaintiffs had distinct, reasonable, investment-backed expectations that their
property would only be subject to flooding in line with the historical hydrograph of the Middle
Mississippi River.
241. Atypical flooding and increased flood velocities have significantly interfered with
that property interest and upset Plaintiffs’ reasonable, investment-backed expectations on a
temporary and permanent basis.
242. That atypical flooding and increased flood velocities is and has been a direct and
foreseeable result of the Army Corps’ construction of Structures in the Rivers.
243. The Corps continued construction of Structures has been for the purpose of
achieving a public good; namely, to facilitate navigation on the Rivers.
244. Plaintiffs’ property has been subjected to atypical and recurrent flooding that
would not otherwise have occurred. To the extent that natural seasonal flooding would have
occurred in the absence of the Corps’ Structures, it has been severely altered and aggravated by
the Structures.
53
245. By continuing to aggressively constrict and train the river with Structures, the
Corps caused, and continue to cause, atypical flooding of Plaintiffs’ property and increased flood
velocities, interfering with Plaintiffs’ reasonable, investment backed expectations.
246. The Corps knew or should have known that its constriction of the river by
Structures would result in the breach of the Len Small Levee and atypical flooding of Plaintiffs’
property.
247. Such atypical flooding of Plaintiffs’ property was the direct, natural, probable,
and foreseeable result of the Corps’ actions.
248. The atypical flooding of Plaintiffs’ property has interfered with Plaintiffs’
property interests for a substantial period of time and, in some instances, permanently destroyed
Plaintiffs’ property or permanently deprived Plaintiffs of the use and enjoyment of their property.
249. The Corps took flowage easements over Plaintiffs’ property without just
compensation.
250. The Corps took Plaintiffs’ property for a public purpose.
251. The Corps’ actions are attributable to the United States.
252. The United States government has not provided Plaintiffs with just compensation
for its taking of Plaintiffs’ property.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that this Court enter judgment on their behalf, against the
Defendant, adjudging and decreeing that:
A. Defendant took Plaintiffs’ property without just compensation in violation of the Fifth
Amendment of the United States Constitution;
54
B. Judgment be entered against the Defendants and in favor of Plaintiffs for
compensation for the property right taken from them, together with the costs of suit,
including reasonable attorneys’ fees and interest;
C. Plaintiffs be awarded just compensation for their deprivation and losses;
D. Plaintiffs have such other, further, and different relief as the case may require and the
Court may deem just and proper under the circumstances.
Dated: August 3, 2018 Respectfully Submitted,
Ethan A. Flint, Attorney of Record

Adam M. Riley, Of Counsel
Flint Law Firm, LLC
222 E. Park St., Suite 500
P.O. Box 189
Edwardsville, IL 62025
T: (618) 288-4777 F: (618) 288-2864
eflint@flintlaw.com
ariley@flintlaw.com
55

Jackson-Greely Farm Inc. vs. US

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jackson-Greely Farm Inc. vs. US

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jackson-Greely Farm Inc. vs. US

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 1:18-cv-01141-EDK Document 1 Filed 08/03/18 Page 1 of 55

Receipt number 9998-4831776

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

Jackson-Greenly Farm, Inc.; Oehler Farm

THE UNITED STATES,

NATURE OF THE CLAIM

2. Specifically, to maintain a navigable river channel in the Rivers and minimize

datum. Stage is measured by local gage stations along the Rivers.

4. As a result of increased WSEs, Plaintiffs’ property has become inundated more

water table, and has left debris on Plaintiffs’ property.

narrow the flood plain.

invasion of Plaintiffs’ property, appropriating Plaintiffs’ rights therein, by effectively imposing

flowage easements on Plaintiffs’ property.

Commercial Point to Ohio River.

the mandated minimum widths without obtaining Congressional authorization.

cases, permanently. All of Plaintiffs’ lands are subject to atypical flooding,

aggravated by the Structures.

profoundly disrupting and interfering with Plaintiffs’ reasonable, investment-backed

primarily by the Corps own construction of river training Structures.

appropriated for public use.

compensation, for the public benefit.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

businesses in Alexander County, Illinois.

businesses in Alexander County, Illinois.

Len Small levee and other atypical flooding events.

levee and other atypical flooding events.

Small levee and other atypical flooding events.

Len Small levee and other atypical flooding events.

Len Small levee and other atypical flooding events.

levee and other atypical flooding events.

levee and other atypical flooding events.

Len Small levee and other atypical flooding events.

levee and other atypical flooding events.

Len Small levee and other atypical flooding events.

levee and other atypical flooding events.

levee and other atypical flooding events.

Len Small levee and other atypical flooding events.

levee and other atypical flooding events.

Len Small levee and other atypical flooding events.

levee and other atypical flooding events.

levee and other atypical flooding events.

levee and other atypical flooding events.

levee and other atypical flooding events.

Small levee and other atypical flooding events.

levee and other atypical flooding events.

available seasonally, limiting the utility of the Rivers for transport.

chamber. Congress authorized construction, following the Board’s recommendation, in the

narrow and deep channel.

that priority objective through an expanding toolkit of river training structures.

THE EXPANDING CORPS TOOLKIT

Mississippi River by constructing river training Structures to constrict the channel.

segments, with a cumulative length of 378,982 feet.

upstream to the northern boundary of St. Louis, Missouri.

than the estimated flow for 1844.

efforts to manage the Rivers.

Mississippi River and its tributaries with extensive dike construction.

bank full channel capacity on the Missouri River.

an effect on flood heights.

creating a nine-foot channel on the upper Mississippi.”

navigation channel. The Corps’ subsequent construction of Structures is oriented primarily