Originally posted by KC0PET Yes, the floodwaters are mostly stagnant, but the main channel of the Missouri River is off in the distance and it is ripping along.
While it is bad for folks on the flood plain, the more flood water spreads out onto the flood plain and then slowly finds its way back to the channel, the less flooding the people downstream will have to cope with.
And then, too, when that flood water spreads out and drops its load of silt, it is fertilizing those fields, and is repeating what got that soil so rich in the first place.
My grandfather's farm--in Adams County, Illinois--was partly on a flood plain, not of the Mississippi, not of the Illinois River, but of McKee Creek (locally known as Muhgee Crick). His only really good crop field was along the crick. His upland fields, formerly forested land with thin brown soil, would grow grass and, with fertilization, crops of hay, but he could only grow corn to feed his hogs in that floodplain field. Sometimes the field would partly flood, after he had planted, rotting the seed or seedling plants, and when the water went down, he'd have to replant those rows by hand with a hoe and bag of seed (often with his eldest child, my Mom, helping out). Some years, nearly the entire field would flood, but then the whole field got refertilized. But with the house, barn, barnyard--improvements as they are called--up on the bluff or other high ground, the floods were mainly inconveniences not ordeals of damage and destruction. And when the floods left a pond full of water in lower part of that flood plain field, lasting several weeks sometimes, it was often stocked with some good-sized catfish to catch.