The Arkansas Natural Resources Commission is beginning work on a drought plan to ensure that the state is prepared to respond to the next one like any other natural disaster, according to officials working on the plan.
Arkansas is one of three states to not have a drought plan, Water Resources Division Manager Edward Swaim told the agency's board of commissioners Jan. 20. The other two states are Wisconsin and Alaska.
Swaim and others at the commission are working with the University of Nebraska-Lincoln National Drought Mitigation Center and the Southern Climate Impacts Planning Program at the University of Oklahoma in formulating the plan.
Mark Shafer, director of the Southern Climate Impacts Planning Program, said drought plans can be broken down into two categories: response and mitigation.
A drought-response plan would develop monitors to indicate when drought conditions are approaching, Shafer said. It also would include a communication system for people involved in responding to drought and an action plan for when it happens.
A mitigation plan is more in-depth, identifying areas and industries vulnerable to a drought, Shafer said. The plan would include a strategy of trying to lessen the effect of a drought.
Right now, the state and universities are starting with the basics, he said.
The idea for a drought plan came up during discussions on Arkansas' update to its water plan, when water levels insufficient to meet usage needs were projected for east Arkansas in the coming decades, Swaim said.
In 2012's severe drought, Swaim said, networks of aid formed in response to the event as farmers and businesses identified growing needs.
"Different agencies were talking to each other, but it was really reactive to what the situation was," he said.
A plan would help the state anticipate needs and a course of action before the drought happens, Swaim said.
"We know we would save some people from some economic loss," he said.
For example, Swaim said, if two towns near each other drew from two different reservoirs, but one reservoir was smaller and could deplete in a serious drought, a drought plan could identify that scenario and plan a way for the larger reservoir to serve the other town without connecting them in a quick, more expensive way during an emergency.
Good monitoring of drought can help the state keep up with the issue as it unfolds, Shafer said.
"If it's lagging, then it may be hard for people in counties to effectively get that aid," he said. "So that's probably the biggest economic impact."
The National Drought Mitigation Center's website cites research that indicates drought planning is a more efficient way to address drought when it happens, because after-the-fact assistance to farmers "is expensive and doesn't necessarily reach the right people."
The Federal Emergency Management Agency estimates each dollar spent on mitigation saves an average of $4.
Drought planning is like other emergency planning, Shafer said. As with other natural disasters, being prepared makes cleanup a lot easier, he said.
"In general, drought planning is the same as planning for a tornado, earthquake, flood," he said. "It's just another natural disaster that we have."
Metro on 01/31/2016